Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
Can you guys mention the differences beetween flamenco and nuevo flamenco?
Oh yeah another question My friend ask me whether Paul Gilbert's Flamingo is Flamenco or not I can tell that its not "the actual flamenco" since it doesn't have any compas but I don't think I have any other details to make them sure What's your opinion guys? Thanks :)
RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (in reply to Arash)
quote:
Fakemenco
I hate that term. No music is fake and no music is better than another. Thiinking like that is just like racism and generalizations.
Many of the artists named as doing 'fakeamenco' don't even promote themselves as flamenco players. It's more of the consumers (that don't know anything about flamenco, and that is understandable) that think it's Spanish and associate it with flamenco.
I would think that Flamenco is pretty well defined, if the music does not respect that, it isn't flamenco. Even you can probably tell if something is flamenco or not although it's not always obvious for the free form palos.
Originally people did not even like the idea of a bass or flute, that could not be flamenco; where do you set the limit, to the instruments, to the palos, compas.
Was a band playing flamenco ever new flamenco and now it's just flamenco as people have adapted. Are there set rules somewhere written is stone that never ever change, who wrote them?
Posts: 4516
Joined: Aug. 9 2006
From: Iran (living in Germany)
RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (in reply to rogeliocan)
sorry, didn't want to hurt your feelings. it was more intented as a little joke. though, i don't agree that "no music is better than another". but anyway, i am not in the mood for such discussions. had these quite a number of times in the foro. again sorry.
RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (in reply to qzack)
Good thoughts there roge. I have basically the same opinion. And it can´t get discussed enough since its a phenomena of major impact in the flamenco world, Arash. ;)
The problem many flamenco artists have with "nuevo" or "Fake" flamenco or however they call it is: It sells better than what they perform because it is easy listening. They work their ass off to become a good flamenco musician and these guys can rarely hold the guitar in the right position and make twice as much money. Thats all. So it´s about money and partially jealousy.
All the big guys in flamenco like Paco, Vicente, Tomatito, Gerardo,..and all others play rumbas and easy listening as well. So why should it be a problem to record a CD solely with easy rumbas that are very enjoyable.
Its sad that a rumba with 2 chords gets more attention than a fabulous composed and played Solea. But thats how it is.
RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (in reply to Arash)
quote:
sorry, didn't want to hurt your feelings. it was more intented as a little joke. though, i don't agree that "no music is better than another". but anyway, i am not in the mood for such discussions. had these quite a number of times in the foro. again sorry.
Did not mean it like that at all and not at you. I am just saying I don't like the term. But in terms of 'better' isn't that very personal in nature. I agree that some music is more complex than others but better? Is a cheese better than another, is Coke better than Pepsi?
Posts: 1937
Joined: Dec. 2 2006
From: Budapest, now in Southampton
RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (in reply to rogeliocan)
thing is, "that" genre of music somehow got labelled as nuevo flamenco, while in fact it has nothing to do with it...it's played on guitar, sometimes uses the phrygian scale...of course it'll be mocked by real flamencos...this wouldn't happen if it was named anything else, say #&@, then people wouldn't mistake "us" for "them"...it's really annoying having to explain the difference all the time...i think with the history of flamenco, with us putting in so much work in it, we earn the right to mock that genre which is frankly, crap compared to what flamenco is... and i find it very difficult to understand real flamencos defending our own rights to mockery... (and i haven't even mentioned the economic part...we're being ripped off, big time)
RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (in reply to qzack)
Imo it's something that relate principaly to SOLO guitar. All the big fakers artists that I heard named (i never listened to them btw) perform soloist while labelling nouveau flamenco.
So do not focus on solo guitar and you'll have less trouble dealing with them
_____________________________
"The most important part of Flamenco is not in knowing how to interpret it. The higher art is in knowing how to listen." (Luis Agujetas)
Posts: 4516
Joined: Aug. 9 2006
From: Iran (living in Germany)
RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (in reply to Doitsujin)
Actually its not about money and jelousy as Doitsujin mentioned and here is why:
All the "real" flamencos could play all the nuevo stuff and make more money than they do today (actually some do, some switch to that or at least play some of that stuff to make more money), but they chose not to do that and chose to play the "real" stuff.
So its not jelousy and money, because they CAN do the same as the nuevo guys, if they just WANTED. Jelousy occurs only if you CAN't do something somebody else does and if you have a character that gets angry at that. Thats jelousy.
Its the disspointment as (1) why the nuevo guys misuse the word "flamenco" and (2) why most people don't "get it" , what we play.
Nothing else. As mentioned, the discussion is old and the points and arguments are also old ;-)
Posts: 3467
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (in reply to qzack)
There is a difference between nuevo flamenco and fakemenco. Nuevo flamenco is still considered to be flamenco. Although one might debate whether one prefers nuevo or traditional flamenco (I much prefer the more traditional), nuevo still has characteristics that define it as flamenco. Although I didn't like the bass and harmonica evident in Paco de Lucia's latest tour, and it didn't appeal to me as flamenco, I still recognized that it is flamenco with the boundaries pushed beyond my taste. I did like the concert as good music; I just didn't like it as flamenco.
Fakemenco, on the other hand, is clearly not flamenco but is passed off as flamenco. If I remember correctly, Ottmar Liebert had an album that was listed as flamenco. Ottmar Liebert does not play flamenco, and, in my opinion, is an example of fakemenco, since he passed his playing off as flamenco. Another example that is sometimes passed off as flamenco is the group The Gypsy Kings. Now, the Gypsy Kings play very good music. I like it a lot. But one of their concerts in Washington, DC was advertised as featuring "fiery flamenco songs such as Bamboleo." Bamboleo??? If they had not made the claim that Bamboleo was an example of "fiery flamenco" they would have been fine, in my book. By making such a claim, they passed into the realm of fakemenco.
Cheers,
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white, With the name of the late deceased, And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here, Who tried to hustle the East."
RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (in reply to qzack)
"real" flamencos... Comeon.. There are no "real" flamencos" popular at all. All the big guys u see are businesmen. There is no purity or connection to the roots or the wish to tell something left anymore. It´s all about making money. And the guys who can do that by playing complex things, do that, like Vicente etc. and the people who can´t, do the easy stuff. And here the jealousy and terms like fake and nuevo come into play (Mostly by people who can play really good but aren´t popular.. small dogs bark loud.."I want I want I want..woff woff woff", while the guys who are in business are silent.)
So its all about money and about that you can get more gigs with the easy stuff than with complex flamenco guitar. That simple. Doesn´t matter if somebody can do something or not. It only matters what is actually done.
The only interesting point had Barkell who differs between fakemenco and nuevo. Thats interesting.
Posts: 15242
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (in reply to qzack)
quote:
ORIGINAL: qzack
Can you guys mention the differences beetween flamenco and nuevo flamenco?
Oh yeah another question My friend ask me whether Paul Gilbert's Flamingo is Flamenco or not I can tell that its not "the actual flamenco" since it doesn't have any compas but I don't think I have any other details to make them sure What's your opinion guys? Thanks :)
Simply put, it has to fall with in the frame of the proper song form to be called flamenco music. To equate what you will understand, think of the blues. It is a clearly defined song form, though it can be faster or slower, different types of swing, etc, but very distinct from say "BLUESY ROCK" or bluesy jazz. you can have the same chords and same scale, but if it is not literally the same 12 bar structure it simply is NOT THE BLUES. No respectable rock or jazz guitarist would confuse what they do with a proper blues guitarist, and often make the distinction. But for sure some dumb kids do a bend on the pentatonic scale and say "look at me, I am playing the blues now!!!!!".
In flamenco music we have more than one type of form, but similar idea, and if you break the rules of the structure, it is not flamenco any more. We don't have a term like "Flamenco-y" like when we call some rock "bluesy", but you can get the idea from the word "spanishy" which may use similar chords and scales, but not the proper form as flamenco.
Hope that clears it without getting into specifics.
About big dogs and jealousy....don't forget Paco de Lucia had to call out on Ottmar back in the 90's when he got constantly pestered about the "new flamenco guy Ottmar Leibert"....so the "fakemenco" label was an inevitablity after the genre took off and perpetuated the confusion.
RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (in reply to BarkellWH)
quote:
ORIGINAL: BarkellWH
There is a difference between nuevo flamenco and fakemenco. Nuevo flamenco is still considered to be flamenco. Although one might debate whether one prefers nuevo or traditional flamenco (I much prefer the more traditional), nuevo still has characteristics that define it as flamenco. Although I didn't like the bass and harmonica evident in Paco de Lucia's latest tour, and it didn't appeal to me as flamenco, I still recognized that it is flamenco with the boundaries pushed beyond my taste. I did like the concert as good music; I just didn't like it as flamenco.
Fakemenco, on the other hand, is clearly not flamenco but is passed off as flamenco. If I remember correctly, Ottmar Liebert had an album that was listed as flamenco. Ottmar Liebert does not play flamenco, and, in my opinion, is an example of fakemenco, since he passed his playing off as flamenco. Another example that is sometimes passed off as flamenco is the group The Gypsy Kings. Now, the Gypsy Kings play very good music. I like it a lot. But one of their concerts in Washington, DC was advertised as featuring "fiery flamenco songs such as Bamboleo." Bamboleo??? If they had not made the claim that Bamboleo was an example of "fiery flamenco" they would have been fine, in my book. By making such a claim, they passed into the realm of fakemenco.
Cheers,
Bill
The word "nuevo flamenco" isn't to be understood literally, I think people here mean it as the self-descriptive marketing term seemingly popular in the US that guys like Ottmar etc. use (basically the very thing you describe in your second paragraph). So no, "nuevo flamenco" doesn't equal "modern flamenco" for most people.
Posts: 3467
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (in reply to rogeliocan)
quote:
I hate that term. No music is fake and no music is better than another.
Music is fake when it is passed off as something it is not, such as that which is "Spanishy" and passed off as flamenco but clearly is not. It might be nice music, but it is being falsely promoted as a genre that it is not. Would you be pleased with a Chinese-made guitar being passed off as a Felipe V Conde? It might be a nice guitar, but it is a fake.
Cheers,
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white, With the name of the late deceased, And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here, Who tried to hustle the East."
Posts: 3467
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (in reply to Munin)
quote:
The word "nuevo flamenco" isn't to be understood literally, I think people here mean it as the self-descriptive marketing term seemingly popular in the US that guys like Ottmar etc. use (basically the very thing you describe in your second paragraph).
That has not been my understanding of the term, Munin, but if you are correct and the majority of aficionados consider your definition, cited above, to be "nuevo flamenco," then I would have to conclude that "nuevo flamenco" is a contradiction in terms, an oxymoron. It cannot be "nuevo flamenco" if it is not "flamenco" in the first place.
Cheers,
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white, With the name of the late deceased, And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here, Who tried to hustle the East."
RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (in reply to BarkellWH)
quote:
Music is fake when it is passed off as something it is not,
Agreed. I'm saying that the music itself is not fake, it's just not flamenco. As far as the musicians who present themselves as playing flamenco, I agree with you.
Looks like New Flamenco is the category that is used for the style. Nothing wrong with that except that it confuses the layman. When these poor souls go to a real flamenco show thinking it will be new flamenco, they are normally in for a surprise and often end up saying: Man did that girl/man sing bad or what!
Posts: 4516
Joined: Aug. 9 2006
From: Iran (living in Germany)
RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (in reply to Arash)
Doit, so you are basically saying flamencos are wannabe investment bankers walking around with dollar signs in their eyes whole day, without making a penny Then they must be all stupid to chose flamenco as their income source and be jelous through out the whole gig they do each day... cause for sure most know that they can't have the success of paco or vicente,,, no wait, they are stupid, and delusional at the same time,,,they all believe they can be the next paco and have a villa in mexico. thats why they play complex stuff instead of repeating 2 chords and show us their naked feet.
RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (in reply to BarkellWH)
quote:
There is a difference between nuevo flamenco and fakemenco. Nuevo flamenco is still considered to be flamenco. Although one might debate whether one prefers nuevo or traditional flamenco (I much prefer the more traditional), nuevo still has characteristics that define it as flamenco.
Could you provide us some Names (3 or 4 artists) that you consider representative of nouveau flamenco? I think you confuse yourself with the "Flamenco Joven" label.
quote:
By making such a claim, they passed into the realm of fakemenco.
sure. GK fakemencos!! ahahah good joke...
_____________________________
"The most important part of Flamenco is not in knowing how to interpret it. The higher art is in knowing how to listen." (Luis Agujetas)
I feel like I can say with confidence that flamenco IS better music than Britney spears.
What exactly makes it "better"?
Do realize how incredibly talented the people are who produce, write and record Brit's songs? Those guys are amazing at what they do. Just as much as any flamenco guitarist.
Brittney is just a face, not a singer. Of course we all know that. I'm talking about the guys that actually make the records
The sounds, the programming, the editing, the mixing, etc.. Seriously amazing work.
Its clearly not your taste, but thats a taste issue. Nothing is "Better" or "worse" It just is what it is. It lies totally in the ear of the beholder.
RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (in reply to ToddK)
Some modern flamenco-
La Tana with Antonio Moya's raw power. I enjoy how there are four other guitarists just sitting there unneeded, he's making the noise of five guitars all on his own! Of course La Tana's cante is great and so is her footwork at 6.17 listen from the start of Moya's falseta at 6.04 (Just looking for any excuse to post this one.)
This is also modern flamenco but quite different. (I think noone on the foro has yet mentioned Paquete's newly released solo album?)
Posts: 3467
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
RE: flamenco vs nuevo flamenco (in reply to mezzo)
quote:
GK fakemencos!! ahahah good joke...
Not a joke when they advertise (it was on their billing) Bamboleo as "fiery flamenco." That is pure misrepresentation, i.e., fakemenco.
Cheers,
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white, With the name of the late deceased, And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here, Who tried to hustle the East."
Printable Version
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread