good old memories

kiekiekiekiekie 

I remember this particular video as a kid. Somebody should digitize all of Trio Dasufa's material including operettas and musicals. 

I do recall Ferre using "Ah yoleli ah yo ah yo" in his generique, not Ferre, however I do know Ferre used portions of Lokuta Monene in his.  I guess my question is, are these artists paying for these interpolations? Lyrics and melodies belonging to Franco & Tabu Ley are being borrowed all of the time, and even JB is guilty of sampling Franco's melodies on Soyons Serieux. My worry is that these artists are "borrowing" creativity from the artists of yester-years and there is no compensation to them or their families.

there is a 1h  video on youtube,just type dasufa trio you'll find that video
indeed there are no compensation for the simple reason that copyright has almost always been a mess in our dear country
 in the  last 20 years,its very easy to find 200+ old melodies or song parts introduced in songs from those recent years
and its just end up is a question from the most serious journalists who'll notice it but thats it
maybe the return of papa verckys in kinshasa  will change a lot of things

Wow quelle nolstalgie  abula ngando na commandent danga wow I must have been in 10 or 11 around this time 

lol i loved their lingala "mubutama mubali mukutikala mubali"
 they have inspired many animation and choreographies when you think well about it

My all time fav. Guitar player,the late Shiro Shiro of Zaiko, used to be their accompa..Kalonji Bill took some of their animations and Minzoto wella Wella

This Trio Tasufa thing is the ultimate theme and inspiration for Mbuta Likasu, too.

Anyway, I think you don't address this copyright and revenue problem correctly. Copyright and revenue is useful in certain cases, but shouldn't be administered strictly when it comes to artists borrowing materials from each other. Borrowing old material and reusing it is an ultimate and normal human behavior. This is what builds a culture, this is what guarantees that the values of the past can live on in younger generations. This is something favourable, and this helped making Zairean music big, when the they set up community houses where people could show their traditional culture, and the modern musicians, like Zaiko members, borrowed segments of this cultural heritage, and this is how the person of the atalaku was born. They invited the two person from this traditional scene who became outstanding: Bebe and Nono. Do you think the atalaku thing could evolve so successfully, if those people on the cultural meetings who introduced this role would have insisted on copyright and revenue all the time? For example Bebe and Nono start legal action against Roberto Wunda? Would youu have liked to see no songs with Roberto Wunda for the sake of copyrights? Copyright is what killed culture as a pehomenon in western music. Western pop music is no more a culture, it is a fashion. There are no styles that could become a true 'culture' because artists don't dare to reuse old material due to legal barriers. But without this, there is no culture. One of the most important feature of a culture is that you have a heritage, that the forthcoming generations have access to and they feel like to use it. Insisting on copyrights kills this. This is what killed OK Jazz after Franco's death, and this can be one reason why Congolese music can be even less in the future than it is today. Franco's family made a big debate on revenues, and no authority forced them to stay silent, and consider that what the OK Jazz represents worths way much more socially than the cash the family expect. In the end, the family got its money, but a whole country lost a fuel of its culture. Did it worth? I think no. Artists should understand that a song they write never belongs to them fully. It is partly independent of them, and a public property. They have to allow reuse of their songs, if they want to keep the culture alive. Look at the Congolese artists, they all became selfish, they are chasing their own wealth. What is the result? Not a truly good CD for years. Copyrights has its place: when you want to avoid pirate copies of disks, when you want to collect cash from the radio, and when somebody steals your song, not reuse, but when he claims he wrote it. Those are the occasions for useful administering of copyrights. Borrowing materials and reinterpreting should be free of copyright claims.

Bencuri, you can't use someone else's material that is copyrighted without their permission or atleast paying some type of payment to that person.Wheter  its products, clothes, CDs etc. people don't won't other people to gain money and credit on their work. American artists sometimes use the same extract lyrics it beats in their music but will change it around so they won't get hit with lawsuits. And there has been good Congolese albums in the last 10 years.

This captain of Trio Dasufa reminds me of Mario

 

lol i was actually thinking the same when i saw this videos again,demi tour ayyyyyyyiiiiiiiiii,yo mu kukenda boye,their "customised" lingala was so funny

lol i was actually thinking the same when i saw this videos again,demi tour ayyyyyyyiiiiiiiiii,yo mu kukenda boye,their "customised" lingala was so funny

Bambura ye mbata!!! kiekiekiekie

Bencuri, you can't use someone else's material that is copyrighted without their permission or atleast paying some type of payment to that person.Wheter  its products, clothes, CDs etc. people don't won't other people to gain money and credit on their work. American artists sometimes use the same extract lyrics it beats in their music but will change it around so they won't get hit with lawsuits. And there has been good Congolese albums in the last 10 years.

If you write a song and become famous with it, and then years after someone takes this song and reuses it and becomes famous with it too, not by claiming it as his own song, but just by playing it, copyrights shouldn't be claimed, or only to a limited extent. When you write song and someone uses it and he becomes famous by it but you remain unknown, in that case copyright should be claimed.

Music and songs are not physical objects like meat. You cannot sell it by pound. Things like pirate copying and reuse appear because in some aspect they are normal human needs. And lawmakers should consider the circumstances when copyright Claims should be overlooked, even if there is pirate copying or reuse. If you copy a CD and give the copy to a friend who is interested in that music but has no money to buy every single album from the shop, it is normal. Even if lawmakes try to blame it. It is as normal as when you have a grilfriend and you feel the need to make love with her. When pirate copying reaches an unethical extent, that is another story. For example you want to make a business by pirate copying. That should be sanctioned. The problem with the average copyright law is that it sanctions things that are normal human needs that shouldn't be blamed. It is a normal human need to ask for a song in a concert to be played, even if the song was not written by the artist who is performing at that particular concert. However, recently this is also illegal. But, such needs are what keep a culture alive. If you don't make exceptions in these cases regarding copyrights, you fill the pockets of individuals, but you kill the culture.

Anyway, such ideas that are expressed by me are not unfamiliar in business. In fashion industry, it is a general practice to limit the number of patents. Yet, what you can see the fashion industry is not starving. Because this practice helps to fuel inspiration and creativity. That's why I am saying all the time loosening on copyrights on song reuse could help Congolese music return to its roots and have foreign music gain less impact on it. And the money that would go missing by this from the pockets of the artists should be provided by the government in forms of prizes and support instead. This should be the role of the culural minister to provide a background for it and organize this, and not that he is monitoring all the time whether copyrights are violated or not.

And I don't deny there were albums in the last decade that had got some memorable highlights, but I don't think their level compares to Kalayi Boeing by Wenge, Trop Cest Trop by Extra Musica, Avis de Recherche by Zaiko or Fiesta D'or by Aurlus Mabele. To my mind during the last decade Congolese releases improved only in one aspect: incorporating more foreign elements than before. For me these are not good news.

Bencuri, I just believe that R.Kelly can't sing a James Brown song in a concert or the studio if he isn't going to ask his estate for permission or give his estate some money. But what he can do is do a cover song without permission and. It make profit from it. And if people can't afford a CD or album the. They should just save up money or have someone buy it for them. I'm against pirating and stealing music (even though I've done it a lot of times). You can keep culture by doing what I've stated above.

You can definitely keep things going the way you mention, but it is not culture, it is individual business. This copyright thing is especially a concern in the US, there music is not a culture but business. Compare classical music to it from Europe. Pieces can be replayed by any orchestra any time, no revenue issues. And the composers who wrote those pieces lived on support from courts and nobleman especially, and not copyrights, and never found it abnormal when their compositions were replayed by anyone. And those pieces have been played for centuries. Where are US stars compared to this, I have just read Madonna is excluded from UK radios for being unfashionable. Another person who got rich by copyrights. She is rich, but did she became a cultural element? No, just another person to be forgotten soon. American songs survive only until a band is present. If you want to hear your favourite classical song, you browse the net for a concert and find an orchestra that plays it, and you attend that concert. If you want to hear your favourite rock song, what can you do? Put on a CD. But in most cases you have to forget to hear it live unless the band who wrote it is in town. For me this is what is not normal.

Or think of this: you visit masai people in Kenya to see their culture. What do you experience: They geather on the centre of the village and perform music and dance. Tunes, that are centuries years old. It is normal. Noone asks copyright for it. And noone ever did. If there is a song you like, they perform it. The same in my country if you visit a folk musician. If you like a song, you can freely request it and they play it, no matter who wrote that song. If an artist likes a song he can freely play it in public. This is a normal human behavior and noone ever blamed it. These things that I mentioned make a culture a culture.

It would be also absolutely normal that Kelly plays a song of Brown if he likes one of his songs and he feels he would like to play it. Not because of the money, but because he likes it. And I am sure there would even be fans who would appreciate it. Why he does not do it is because of the law, and possibly because the authorities repeated the importance of copyrights so much that they forgot about their normal human needs. And they think something is bad that actually is not. So they don't play the songs of each other. If they would, they would represent a culture. As they do not do it, it is not a culture thy represent but private businesses, that are called: R. Kelly and J. Brown.

This attitude towards copyright serves only the interests of individuals. There was always one thing that benefited from it: North American music and the industry behind it. I cannot find rationalism in that if you like a song, you cannot ask a musician to play it for you live, and you as a musician cannot perform a song in public if you like it. And if you have a friend who would like to ask a CD from you, you cannot copy it for him, if he cannot afford buying it. Blaming all these things for the sake of some people to gain money is not a rational thing to my mind. If these were abnormal human behaviors, noone would ever need a song to be heard anywhere. But there is need, because people like to hear what they like. And this is in what copyright limits them. Artists should understand, there are features of music making that they may not like but this is how it goes. They can deny it and insist on copyrights, but the outcome will be a music factory rather than an artistic production. And that everything you make won't be remembered. If it's worth for them, let they do it, but this doesn't serve the purpose of a culture, nor does it serve the interest of fans.