RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Full Version)

Foro Flamenco: http://www.foroflamenco.com/
- Discussions: http://www.foroflamenco.com/default.asp?catApp=0
- - General: http://www.foroflamenco.com/in_forum.asp?forumid=13
- - - RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco: http://www.foroflamenco.com/fb.asp?m=207362



Message

Arash -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 16 2012 15:40:53)

Yep, there is a difference between people who can play all palos of flamenco , but mix their compositions with modern elements, jazz, play some rumbas from while to while, etc. (they are also refered to as "nuevo flamenco") - and "Ottmars" like in the "bulerias!!?!" video posted above.

Its not about being modern or being more traditional. You have to know what you are doing (play proper flamenco) if you want to call yourself or your album or your song or your whatever flamenco. Otherwise if you misuse the name of an art and have not even a clue which flamenco palos exist and how they work, you are a dumba$s.

This is an absolutely amazing bulieras and as "modern" and jazzy and "nuevo" as it can get (probably many of you can't do anything with it), but its flamenco. If you play flamenco guitar and have at least some basic knowledge about the groove, you should know what i mean. Ask this guy to play the most traditional stuff you know, and he will do it for you. Ask Otti to play a simple compas set in bulerias and he will give you the crap you saw above.

http://www.foroflamenco.com/tm.asp?m=207716&p=1&tmode=1&smode=1



Ricardo -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 16 2012 16:28:32)

quote:

The thing that's frustrating about reading through this thread is not everybody is talking about the same thing when they say "nuevo flamenco". In most things that I've read, nuevo/nouveau/new flamenco has referred to the quasi-Spanish-like guitar recordings like Ottmar Liebert's "Nouveau Flamenco" album. Flamencos get upset about this because it doesn't sound like flamenco, it isn't derived from flamenco, nor does it have anything else to do with flamenco. It is named such only to sell albums. Which is going to sell more: something labeled "easy listening latin guitar" or "new flamenco"? Playing that kind of music doesn't sell more, just the labeling does. If you want to sell more albums, write your songs in English with a catchy chorus that means virtually nothing.


Actually, if you can read spanish, there is a great coffee table book on the subject written by sevillano Luis Clemente, published in 1995 and is called "Historia del NUEVO Flamenco". The book covers it all from history of flamenco, through all the experiments from PDL Camaron etc to Pata negra Ketama, along side all the modern players, and touches on the off shoots including Gypsy Kings and rumba groups and genre, Ottmar and company of new agers etc. So the term has been coined and used in spain for a long time. I feel we english speakers, wanting to separate or make a distinction to weed out the embarrassing "fakemencos" have adopted the term "Modern" instead of "nuevo" as nuevo is simply too broad and carries too much negative bagage with all the "failed" experiments and such.

Ricardo



bursche -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 16 2012 17:27:23)

Arash, that's flamenco.

What is it that we want to know. In the end there will be no more to say than that nuevo flamenco needs a definition before discussing it and that it is something thats upsets many members here if it comes along as a marketing label for music that is neither flamenco nuevo nor antiguo nor tradicional etc. but simply NOT flamenco.



Leñador -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 16 2012 17:56:29)

You guys will love this, it's all in the opening line. Crusade against cleaning up wikipedia?? [:D]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottmar_Liebert



qzack -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 16 2012 22:12:14)

Wow the response is incredible! Thanks guys [:)]
Pity I can't join this discussion deeper since I have limited thoughts but the infos about the misconception here in my place
If I ask them the word flamenco, most of them wouldn't know or start to name some artist like paul gilbert, ottmar liebert, Al Di Meola, Yngwie Malmsteen, john h clarke, jesse cook, even el mariachi and depapepe. Another case that they'll consider it as classic, latin jazz or even bossa nova [:D] the worst part is when I heard a local artist that labelled his album with "flamenco", but the whole track sounds more like ottmar and his kind [:D]
I can't say more about this [:D]

Though they usually argue that the scales are just common so they generalize all the stuffs even to the higher level like using steel-stringed guitar or electric guitar to play flamenco.

The suggestion of putting them ear to ear with classical flamenco, modern flamenco, and "fakemencos" is effective than to tell them the hard-to-understand compas but the other thing they curious about is the differences in musical harmony theory. I kinda weak for that, but they told me that both flamenco and "fakemencos" has the same mode, scales and progression.. Really?

So I can say that if we want to label our music flamenco, simply obey its musical foundation and that's it, even if it has other minor influence they'll still sound like flamenco. So its about beetween being "spanishy" and "flamenco-y"
Or I have another problem of understanding here? [:D]



Leñador -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 16 2012 22:50:24)

quote:

but they told me that both flamenco and "fakemencos" has the same mode, scales and progression.. Really?


Sure, but that doesn't matter at all. COMPAS COMPAS COMPAS, if it's not following a compas from a specific palo it's not flamenco, nuevo or otherwise, you just can't use the word if it's not in compas. One guy knocking on a table and one guy singing, no guitars at all can be flamenco. Nylon guitar in phrygian mode, not flamenco.

EDIT: Nylon guitar in phrygian mode, not NECESSARILY flamenco. (don't wanna get me head bit off)



kudo -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 16 2012 23:00:02)

from sitting position, guitar and etc, you can tell without hearing the music:
nuevo: [&:]

real modern flamenco:


Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px



Leñador -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 16 2012 23:05:00)

I wouldn't agree with you Kudo, Ottmar is what he is (I don't like it) but to me Vicente Amigo and the likes is nuevo flamenco cus it's still flamenco, just new(nuevo). Ottmar is not new flamenco it's just spanishy easy listening.



Miguel de Maria -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 17 2012 21:40:14)

Richard,
this old horse that every intermediate player seems to need to beat every few months does bring to mind my question--is there, then, any "fakemenco" that could be called good? Or do we call it "fusion" if it's decent? Did you like any of the bold experiments? Would love to have something to explore.



chester -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 18 2012 4:35:26)

Fakemenco is a term that was made up by someone on this forum - not a real music genre.

'Good' is subjective, of course. Jesse Cook has some fans here, and I'm sure if some of the people here would let go of this whole [genre] VS [genre] mindset they would even enjoy music by Ottmar.

There's a saying I like - When someone says 'I know what I like', he really means 'I like what I know'. There's definitely a lot of hivemind mentality behind beating this horse.

Music is supposed to make you feel good and enjoy listening to it, not conform to a set of rules. Labeling is overrated.



paleto3 -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 18 2012 5:59:55)

IMO, fakemenco and fusion are 2 different things. Fusion can be done in such a way that it has important elements of traditional flamenco, but fakemenco, IMO, is usually done by people who haven't put the time and effort in to grasp traditional flamenco.

Fusion can be a whole spectrum from great to crap depending on the level of musicianship.

There are several local guitarists here in San Diego who act like they have a grasp of traditional flamenco by saying they are firmly grounded in flamenco, but when you see them try to play a bulería, it's a joke and you can tell they don't really have the fundamentals down.

No one is perfect, not me, but from what I have seen and heard many of them don't make the effort.

It is true that "good" is subjective, but one's concept of good usually grows and changes with the addition of new knowledge and experience and what a novice thinks is good may not appear so to the seasoned artist.

The fact is, people will do and say what they like, no matter what anyone says. I accept that.

I, for one, find it difficult to enjoy something that seems to me to be lacking in fundamentals. But if other people like it, that's just the way it is.



XXX -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 18 2012 9:36:22)

quote:

ORIGINAL: chester

Fakemenco is a term that was made up by someone on this forum - not a real music genre.


Yep, you've hit the nail on the head, chester. Its not a musical genre [:D]



chester -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 18 2012 23:21:09)

Lol, good one. [:D]

Seriously though, I say live and let live. If people want to play it and others enjoy listening to it - who are we to object? At the end of the day hating on things is a waste of energy.

When I was young I was in to Metallica and most of my friends were listening to stuff like East 17, Take That, and Alanis Morisette. I would get upset over it and hope that one day everyone would realize that my taste is superior to theirs. Well, that day never came.

Same with all this fakemenco nonsense. Just smile, nod your head, and keep walking.



Miguel de Maria -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 19 2012 1:58:05)

Paleto,
I have been thinking about what you wrote earlier, that you can listen to the good stuff and always find new things in it. I am trying to think of any fakemenco that could claim to do that. It seems the offensive thing is that they are just taking a few cliches, a few chord progressions, and mixing them into a pop/rock, hook-based mentality. The result is superficial since it is not based on a deep well of musical ideas and tradition, but rather is a formula.



Florian -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 19 2012 4:37:32)

quote:

I have been thinking about what you wrote earlier, that you can listen to the good stuff and always find new things in it. I am trying to think of any fakemenco that could claim to do that. It seems the offensive thing is that they are just taking a few cliches, a few chord progressions, and mixing them into a pop/rock, hook-based mentality. The result is superficial since it is not based on a deep well of musical ideas and tradition, but rather is a formula.


hit the nail on the head 100%, great way of describing it..its for the masses..based on a formula...the catchy hook etc..not that much depth...but it works on those that cant really concentrate on that much guitar just simple catchy stuff(which seems to the majority of people outside guitar, if past conversations i had with people are anything to go by..."have you heard this amazing flamenco guitarist..." blank")...

Your only choice is to smile and nod or attempt to explain which eventuality ends in awkward silence...and as you walk away the guy is not gonna say " oh wow i have learned something "...hes gonna think you have a chip on your shoulder

and this is not being disrespectful just honest about it



Adam -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 19 2012 5:01:08)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miguel de Maria

Paleto,
I have been thinking about what you wrote earlier, that you can listen to the good stuff and always find new things in it. I am trying to think of any fakemenco that could claim to do that. It seems the offensive thing is that they are just taking a few cliches, a few chord progressions, and mixing them into a pop/rock, hook-based mentality. The result is superficial since it is not based on a deep well of musical ideas and tradition, but rather is a formula.


What does it mean to claim to do something new? Should they have stickers on their CDs claiming "find something new on each listen!"? More seriously, it's a difficult standard to hold artists in any artform up to. Besides a few geniuses - Paco, Gerardo, and a few others - the majority of the excellent flamenco guitarists out there aren't really doing all that much that's new and innovative, and that's fine. We like the music they play, we find it interesting, so we listen to it. Great.

And to be honest, it's the same situation in "fakemenco." It's that way with any genre. There are a few innovators, and lots of imitators. Flamenco is sufficiently multifaceted, deep and rich in history, that even the imitators have plenty of room to add their own voice and make real art. Not so in "fakemenco" (for reasons you've hit on) - which is why, after a couple of years of listening to a lot of it in high school, I fizzled out on the stuff and switched to actual flamenco. But the formulaic behavior you ascribed to the whole genre is better suited to describing the imitators. Spend some time listening to the field and you'll find that no one's figured out how to quite reproduce the best music that, say, the Gipsy Kings or Ottmar put out (as far as the particular brand of music on his first CD goes, even Ottmar never managed to reproduce it. He tried a bit, it didn't work out, so he moved on to something different and, IMO, more interesting. But that CD, with a few very memorable tunes, set a whole boatload of imitators off and running). If these guys were being successfully imitated, I'm sure I would have fallen for it hard in my "fakemenco" days and would have lots more to say [;)] but for the most part the competitors in the field are a forgettable line-up of boring-looking pretty white guys with long hair. It's not to say that the hardest to imitate artists are the best-selling ones, by the way - Benise sells out theatres because he has long flowing Fabio hair and this Cirque du Soleil gimmick, and Armik sells discs to people who've heard that one song he does somewhere before they realize he's put out a dozen CDs consisting of nothing but that one song - but on the whole imitators do have a more difficult time selling records, because there are plenty of imitators to be had, and they're bosonic - they're practically indistinguishable.



BarkellWH -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 19 2012 22:02:26)

I think it was Stephen Faulk (Estebanana) who in another thread observed (I think I'm quoting correctly here):

"Flamenco gives, but it does not take."

I took that to mean that other genres can adopt some flamenco and the result, while not flamenco, can enhance the genre to which it is "given." Flamenco, on the other hand, cannot "take" from other genres without becoming something other than first-rate flamenco. Whether or not that is what Stephen meant, I agree with that interpretation.

Cheers,

Bill



Munin -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 20 2012 0:30:11)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BarkellWH

I think it was Stephen Faulk (Estebanana) who in another thread observed (I think I'm quoting correctly here):

"Flamenco gives, but it does not take."

I took that to mean that other genres can adopt some flamenco and the result, while not flamenco, can enhance the genre to which it is "given." Flamenco, on the other hand, cannot "take" from other genres without becoming something other than first-rate flamenco. Whether or not that is what Stephen meant, I agree with that interpretation.

Cheers,

Bill


I've heard tons of good flamenco that respectfully adds influences from other genres. But I've never heard a single decent example of the opposite except where actual flamencos initiated it or participated in it.



BarkellWH -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 20 2012 1:44:57)

quote:

I've heard tons of good flamenco that respectfully adds influences from other genres. But I've never heard a single decent example of the opposite except where actual flamencos initiated it or participated in it.


Although I clearly disagree with the above-cited statement, it is one more piece of evidence (among many) demonstrating what a diverse group we are on the Foro, with a multitude of opinions gained through personal experience and taste. That's what makes it all so interesting.

Cheers,

Bill



Miguel de Maria -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 20 2012 3:39:51)

Adam,
I take "new" to mean, everytime you listen to it, you hear a nuance that you didn't perceive the first time. It could be anything, a novel strum, a cool countermelody, a weird voicing... I don't mean "new" in the sense that it should necessarily be innovative in and of itself. I think it a matter of complexity. I don't know if you like classical music, but Bach is so full of things going every which way that it bewilders me, while Vivaldi delivers a happy feeling without any work on my part. It may be that I didn't enjoy the Paco de Lucia concert I went to in May because so much of what he did flew over my head.



Adam -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 20 2012 10:43:48)

I love classical music, but if we use Bach (or Vivaldi) as an example we're probably setting ourselves up for disappointment.



qzack -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 29 2012 0:26:31)

so my friend try to play rumba (cmiiw)
is this still called flamenco?



Ricardo -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 29 2012 6:28:53)

quote:

is this still called flamenco?


No.



qzack -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 29 2012 7:29:50)

Wow
Pretty confused down here
What makes flamenco rumba a pure flamenco palos instead of "fakemencos"?

Inconsistency of the compas?
Or no compas at all?
Maybe the wrong chosen harmony played?
Or both?
Or else?

Sorry for asking frequent things repeatedly :(



Ricardo -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 29 2012 10:07:37)

quote:

ORIGINAL: qzack

Wow
Pretty confused down here
What makes flamenco rumba a pure flamenco palos instead of "fakemencos"?

Inconsistency of the compas?
Or no compas at all?
Maybe the wrong chosen harmony played?
Or both?
Or else?

Sorry for asking frequent things repeatedly :(

A flamenco guitarist has to play it. [;)]



koenie17 -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 29 2012 10:16:47)

quote:

What makes flamenco rumba a pure flamenco palos instead of "fakemencos


Lot´s of people don´t consider Rumba to be a palo puro. Like Sevillanas isn´t considered (real)flamenco but more folclore[8|]. Altough almost all flamencos know how to play a rumbita or some sevillanas. Personally I quite enjoy a nice rumba or sevillanas. Also I don´t really like the term fakemenco, I prefer to call it flamenquito or musica aflamencado. The thing is when people call all this real or nuevo flamenco without having any knowledge about it[:@].
To learn flamenco means lot´s of years of study of different palos, compas, techniques, cante, etc. there are no shortcuts!!
This is a very long discussion, with loads of different opinions. Me personally I just like good music played from the heart with some cojones.
I got into flamenco listening to Los Delincuentes, Ojos de Brujo, Martires del Compas and even the Gypsy Kings[&:]. So thanks to the "Fakemenco" I got into el Flamenco puro.

Hope this helps a bit, and I want to add that this is my personal opinion.

quote:

A flamenco guitarist has to play it.

[:D][:D][:D]



jeff_hatcher -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 30 2012 17:18:58)

quote:

I got into flamenco listening to Los Delincuentes, Ojos de Brujo, Martires del Compas and even the Gypsy Kings . So thanks to the "Fakemenco" I got into el Flamenco puro.


I agree. The "fake" flamenco is like a (heavily cut) gateway drug, giving the uninitiated a taste of the good stuff and making them seek out the pure stuff.

I had listened to Strunz and Farah, Jesse Cook, Armik, and some others, and thought the music was superficially pleasant to listen to, it lacked any real depth and fire. Rodrigo and (mostly) Gabriela renewed my interest in this thing called "Flamenco" and got me to look at it a little more closely. After listening to artists like Serrano and Sabicas... I had a better idea of what the source was like.

I have no illusions... I am a babe in the woods when it comes to flamenco, but I think that there are artists who respect to soul of true flamenco, but want to take it somewhere new. Benjamin Woods (flametal, heavy mellow) predominantly plays his metal/flamenco-influenced fusion (and has released some "nuevo flamenco style recordings), but learned to play in the flamenco style at a flamenco dance studio where he was required to play for the dancers and singers in return for his lessons. He is still active in this pursuit. For a boy from California, this is probably as close the the roots of flamenco as you can get.



Miguel de Maria -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 30 2012 17:44:12)

More than this guy?




Munin -> RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (Aug. 30 2012 18:17:46)

quote:


I got into flamenco listening to Los Delincuentes, Ojos de Brujo, Martires del Compas and even the Gypsy Kings . So thanks to the "Fakemenco" I got into el Flamenco puro.


That's hardly what this thread is about. All of those groups you mentioned have actual flamencos as their members or musicians with flamenco roots. Nobody ever considered these a problem or called them "fakemenco". They may include flamenco influences in their music but clearly don't consider themselves as "flamenco".

This thread however was about guys (read: guiris) whose music has nothing to do with flamenco and who clearly have no clue about even the most simple basics of flamenco and yet promote their music as such.



Page: <<   <   1 2 3 [4]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET