| 13th November 2007 06:11 PM |
|
|
| texile |
I just watched the pbs documentary on dvd and i must ask the question once again.
is it stax or motown?
yes, stax had otis, cropper, duck, cropper etc..
but motown had marvin, smoky, holland/dozier/holland...
just a richer, more expansive catalogue.
but it was stax for me first -
i always liked to be different and motown was public domain, americana - EVERYBODY could love it.
but i knew there was a big difference between my girl and knock on wood...
when i was in high school, i went on a mission to collect every stax 45 ever released....and it was that 70s era fingersnap that always popped out at me at the local flea market..
finding them was like finding gold...
i hadn't even heard of half these songs...(like rufus' breakdown, or some other rare hit - i felt like i was discovering something sacred for myself)
stax, early and later eras, had a SOUND and i knew that as soon as they hit the turntable, i would be hooked on that indefinable funk.
motown has the legend, but stax had a real story about being the underdog, about the south....
so what is it?
|
| 13th November 2007 07:10 PM |
|
|
| Mel Belli |
I don't wanna push the analogy too far, but I've always thought that Stax was Stonesy and Motown was Beatles-y. |
| 13th November 2007 07:15 PM |
|
|
| stonedinaustralia |
my analogy
at stax everybody could work up a sweat
but not at motown where only the male artists were permitted to gently perspire
great question tex |
| 13th November 2007 07:27 PM |
|
|
| Sioux |
I agree. Stax is much rawer, wilder, bluesier....I do prefer Stax overall, although I love Smokey, Marvin, early Stevie, and Martha Reeves...
Stax had Otis. 'Nuff said. |
| 13th November 2007 07:30 PM |
|
|
| andrews27 |
Brunswick! |
| 13th November 2007 08:10 PM |
|
|
| lotsajizz |
Stax...gotta love American too |
| 13th November 2007 09:01 PM |
|
|
| Kilroy |
Stax for the sweat |
| 13th November 2007 11:02 PM |
|
|
| texile |
quote:
Mel Belli wrote:
I don't wanna push the analogy too far, but I've always thought that Stax was Stonesy and Motown was Beatles-y.
that's how i see it,
stax was the stones to the motown's beatles.... |
| 14th November 2007 12:02 AM |
|
|
| sirmoonie |
Thats crazy talk. Motown being Beatleish. Thats crazy talk, man. Motown blowed doors. Love it! |
| 14th November 2007 02:28 PM |
|
|
| Blowey |
quote:
sirmoonie wrote:
Thats crazy talk. Motown being Beatleish. Thats crazy talk, man. Motown blowed doors. Love it!
I miss the old ' Liberace Show' .
It was like a Giant COCKtail Party .
Tons of women with their icky thingy's spilling out everywhere .. the men, THE MEN!, with their Gold Medallions nestled in THATCHES of Chest Hair .
HOT DAMN !!!! OH HOT DAAAAMN!!!!!!!
" What a Friggin Party Ronnie ! "
Sigh...
B. Fly ! ™
|
| 14th November 2007 02:33 PM |
|
|
| Child of the Moon |
It's hard to say, because I grew up with Motown, for the most part. Stax, yes, has the essential sweat and some of the finest musicians to ever assemble on record. But too much of it sounds the same to my ears. Motown was a bit more expansive; their sonic palette went further than just, I dunno, Memphis soul.
And honestly? Never into Otis. |
| 14th November 2007 06:53 PM |
|
|
| texile |
quote:
Child of the Moon wrote:
It's hard to say, because I grew up with Motown, for the most part. Stax, yes, has the essential sweat and some of the finest musicians to ever assemble on record. But too much of it sounds the same to my ears. Motown was a bit more expansive; their sonic palette went further than just, I dunno, Memphis soul.
And honestly? Never into Otis.
true,
motown was more versatile...
and that's why i ultimately can't choose one over the other.
but stax had something more earthy, something rooted in southern music culture, both black and white...
it was distinctive in a way that motown could be processed. |
| 14th November 2007 06:57 PM |
|
|
| texile |
that didn't make sense,
i meant to say stax' roots gave it a more distinctive quality whereas, motown could sometimes seem processed.
|
