Imaginative said:

Graycap23 said:

Please point me 2 His R&B, Funk, Hiphop, House, dance, gospel, electro, blues, and jazz records. I want 2 check it ASAP.

Wow, "Mr. Jones," you do sound smarter when you refrain from speaking. I can name tons, but for the sake of time (and knowing full well that you won't actually seek out any of these records) I'll stick to one or to per:

R&B: Got to Get You Into My Life

Funk: What's That You're Doing?, Coming Up

Electro/House: The Fireman LPs

Blues: Why Don't We Do It In the Road?, Man We Was Lonely, Run Devil Run LP, tons actually.

Jazz: Honey Pie

PLUS:

Classical: Liverpool Oratorio, Standing Stone LPs

World Music: Tons of tracks both with the Beatles and Solo

Art Muzak: Thrillington LP

Orchestral Rock: Back to the Egg LP

Punk: Temporary Secretary

Disco: Silly Love Songs

[Edited 6/16/11 9:57am]

I just listened 2 some of this material and most of it does NOT move me at all. Sounds like pure noise. I dig "Got 2 get u into my life" the cover version by EW&F. The Beatles version is just plain corney.

I guess my taste buds 4 music involve more than playing and singing the notes. There is no "feel" 2 the Beatles music. At least not 4 my liking.

Listen 2 the Beatles version of "yesterday" and then go listen 2 Donny Hawathay's version. U will see what I mean.

Militant said:

I don't think cover songs are a good example. What about sampling in hip-hop? Prince has been sampled thousands more times than Dylan or The Beatles. One could just as easily use that as an argument. Plus, Prince's songs are harder to cover than either Dylan or The Beatles. Anyone can cover a Dylan or Beatles song with simply a guitar, or the traditional guitar/bass/drums combination.

Can you do that easily with say, "Shockadelica", "Erotic City", hell any song with the Minneapolis sound? No, you can't, because the songs are more complex musically in terms of the instrumentation used and the way to get that sound. My 10 year old nephew can sit down with an acoustic guitar and sing "Hey Jude" because it's incredibly basic. I'm not commenting on whether that's a good or a bad thing as there's clearly an argument for both, but I'm simply making the point that there are more Beatles covers simply because their songs are much easier to cover. This point is further proven by the fact that the most covered Prince songs are the ones that are the easiest to play or the most basic musically (ie, Kiss). Plus, The Beatles have 20 years between their biggest hits and Prince's biggest hits, so naturally there will be more covers. That's just obvious. And they chased commercial hits more so than Prince did. There's other commercial artists who have had their songs covered more than Prince - but nobody would sit here and say their songs are better on that basis.

Furthermore - Prince has more songs than any other songwriter in Rolling Stone's Top 500 songs of all time. The Beatles are the only "act" that has more, but looking at their songs, some were John's, some were Paul's and there was at least one or two by George. And all 4 of them played the instruments on all the songs and they were all produced by George Martin.

On the Prince songs in there, he played all the instruments AND produced them, and wrote them, on his own. That was kinda what I was getting at in my ORIGINAL statement which you disagreed with. If you look back, I said "There is no singular artist alive with more great songs"

On that basis you can't say "The Beatles", you can only say Paul, or John. Neither of whom, if you look at songs purely written ON THEIR OWN, have more great songs than Prince. And while Dylan has a lot of good songs, almost all of them fall into the same category. Prince has great pop songs, great R&B songs, great funk songs, great rock songs, great acoustic songs, great instrumental tracks, great electro songs...... etc etc etc

[Edited 6/16/11 6:36am]

"I don't think cover songs are a good example. What about sampling in hip-hop?" Doesn't really matter what you think, it's a universally accepted criteria. "Great songs" last forever and get recorded over and over. Sampling is not the same. A song doesn't get sampled, only a small part of a song, sometimes not even that. By the way, Prince has sampled from McCartney, not the other way around.

"Plus, Prince's songs are harder to cover than either Dylan or The Beatles." First, complexity does not make a song good and Prince has TONS of simple songs (The Cross, Rasberry Beret, Starfish & Coffee, etc.) On the contrary, it's much harder to write a "simple" song that will stand the test of time. This is why "Little Red Corvette" is more enduring than most of his more "complex" songs. Secondly, McCartney's music is more sophisticated than you realize. In structure alone, he constantly works in unusual bar counts (i.e. 7 measure choruses, 6 measure verses, non-repeating sections). Lastly, there are tons of songwriters more covered than Prince in the top 100 (Prince doesn't make the list), who write much more "complex" (dumb word for music, I prefer "sophisticated") music than Prince:

http://www.secondhandsong...vered#stat

Let's start with Gershwin, Cole Porter, Duke Ellington, Thelonious Monk, Stevie Wonder, the list goes on and on and on and on...

The reason Prince's songs are not really in the same category as the more successful songwriters is that his songs for the most part really only really work for him. No matter what genre Prince is working in, it always sounds like Prince. (This is not a bad thing; it just is.) A "great" song will be maliable to any particular artist's particular style. Prince's compositions aren't. Even Sinead's "Nothing Compares 2 U," kind of sounds more like Prince than it does Sinead.

"And while Dylan has a lot of good songs, almost all of them fall into the same category." If "great" is a "category," then you're absolutely correct. Bob Dylan's catalog has been covered in every single genre you can name and many you can't, because the songs work in any context you put them in. This is the true testament of a "great song."

[Edited 6/16/11 10:29am]

Graycap23 said:

I just listened 2 some of this material and most of it does NOT move me at all. Sounds like pure noise. I dig "Got 2 get u into my life" the cover version by EW&F. The Beatles version is just plain corney.

I guess my taste buds 4 music involve more than playing and singing the notes. There is no "feel" 2 the Beatles music. At least not 4 my liking.

Listen 2 the Beatles version of "yesterday" and then go listen 2 Donny Hawathay's version. U will see what I mean.

That's fine and dandy. No one is telling you what to like. The rest of the world, billions and billions of people, cherish the music of The Beatles and Paul McCartney, more than they do Prince. The Beatles still continue to hit the charts with 40 year old music!

But just becuase you're Dylan's "Mr. Jones," doesn't make the music bad.

[Edited 6/16/11 10:33am]

Imaginative said:

Militant said:

I don't think cover songs are a good example. What about sampling in hip-hop? Prince has been sampled thousands more times than Dylan or The Beatles. One could just as easily use that as an argument. Plus, Prince's songs are harder to cover than either Dylan or The Beatles. Anyone can cover a Dylan or Beatles song with simply a guitar, or the traditional guitar/bass/drums combination.

Can you do that easily with say, "Shockadelica", "Erotic City", hell any song with the Minneapolis sound? No, you can't, because the songs are more complex musically in terms of the instrumentation used and the way to get that sound. My 10 year old nephew can sit down with an acoustic guitar and sing "Hey Jude" because it's incredibly basic. I'm not commenting on whether that's a good or a bad thing as there's clearly an argument for both, but I'm simply making the point that there are more Beatles covers simply because their songs are much easier to cover. This point is further proven by the fact that the most covered Prince songs are the ones that are the easiest to play or the most basic musically (ie, Kiss). Plus, The Beatles have 20 years between their biggest hits and Prince's biggest hits, so naturally there will be more covers. That's just obvious. And they chased commercial hits more so than Prince did. There's other commercial artists who have had their songs covered more than Prince - but nobody would sit here and say their songs are better on that basis.

Furthermore - Prince has more songs than any other songwriter in Rolling Stone's Top 500 songs of all time. The Beatles are the only "act" that has more, but looking at their songs, some were John's, some were Paul's and there was at least one or two by George. And all 4 of them played the instruments on all the songs and they were all produced by George Martin.

On the Prince songs in there, he played all the instruments AND produced them, and wrote them, on his own. That was kinda what I was getting at in my ORIGINAL statement which you disagreed with. If you look back, I said "There is no singular artist alive with more great songs"

On that basis you can't say "The Beatles", you can only say Paul, or John. Neither of whom, if you look at songs purely written ON THEIR OWN, have more great songs than Prince. And while Dylan has a lot of good songs, almost all of them fall into the same category. Prince has great pop songs, great R&B songs, great funk songs, great rock songs, great acoustic songs, great instrumental tracks, great electro songs...... etc etc etc

[Edited 6/16/11 6:36am]

"I don't think cover songs are a good example. What about sampling in hip-hop?" Doesn't really matter what you think, it's a universally accepted criteria. "Great songs" last forever and get recorded over and over. Sampling is not the same. A song doesn't get sampled, only a small part of a song, sometimes not even that. By the way, Prince has sampled from McCartney, not the other way around.

"Plus, Prince's songs are harder to cover than either Dylan or The Beatles." First, complexity does not make a song good and Prince has TONS of simple songs (The Cross, Rasberry Beret, Starfish & Coffee, etc.) On the contrary, it's much harder to write a "simple" song that will stand the test of time. This is why "Little Red Corvette" is more enduring than most of his more "complex" songs. Secondly, McCartney's music is more sophisticated than you realize. In structure alone, he constantly works in unusual bar counts (i.e. 7 measure choruses, 6 measure verses, non-repeating sections). Lastly, there are tons of songwriters more covered than Prince in the top 100, who write more complex music than Prince:

http://www.secondhandsong...vered#stat

Let's start with Gershwin, Cole Porter, Duke Ellington, Thelonious Monk, Stevie Wonder, the list goes on and on and on and on...

The reason Prince's songs are not really in the same category as the more successful songwriters is that his songs for the most part really only really work for him. No matter what genre Prince is working in, it always sounds like Prince. (This is not a bad thing; it just is.) A "great" song will be maliable to any particular artist's particular style. Prince's compositions aren't. Even Sinead's "Nothing Compares 2 U," kind of sounds more like Prince than it does Sinead.

"And while Dylan has a lot of good songs, almost all of them fall into the same category." If "great" is a "category," then you're absolutely correct. Bob Dylan's catalog has been covered in every single genre you can name and many you can't, because the songs work in any context you put them in. This is the true testament of a "great song."

i disagree. Different artists have different strengths and weaknesses. A song may work for one but may not work for someone else. Prince songs may not be covered as much as some other artists but they still get covered alot and by a diverse group of artists.

Mindflux said:

NDRU said:

The myth of Prince: The Multi-Instrumentalist is that he plays 27 (or 40 or whatever) instruments.

They are not claiming it is a myth that he is a multi-instrumentalist

But its still not a myth - did you see what I wrote above? Just because the OP has decided to determine that we should only classify what instruments Prince plays by taking them to their most base level (i.e. Piano or Percussion), doesn't mean that Prince only plays 4 instruments. What the OP has done is basically the same as if we were to take a trip to the zoo and someone says "Wow, look at all the hundreds of species of animals in this place" and the OP would reply "Hmm, all I see are mammals and reptiles".

You cannot say Prince plays "Percussion" and classify that as one instrument. Any musician ought to know this (unless they have only ever played one instrument themself and have no understanding or experience of playing with other musicians). If you were to make a record and on one track you played electric bass and on another you played upright, you'd be entitled to claim you have played different instruments - they may both perform the function of bass, but they are entirely different instruments to play and in how they sound.

I play percussion, but I would feel that a disservice to what I actually record. I can play full-kit, darbuka, djembe, bongo, conga, cajon, timbale, shaker all to a decent level and I dabble on tabla (though, I wouldn't say I was a competent tabla player - can hold a rhythm, but don't play them "properly"). That's 8 definite instruments that I would say I play and one I dabble in. I also play piano, synths, guitar (acoustic and electric) and bass (electric). I have no problem saying I play a dozen instruments.

That said, I don't list everything I play on my albums (its not entirely necessary) and the only time it was done that I'm aware of with Prince was for his DEBUT album which, of course, would benefit it with some hype. But.....is it really hype? Because the fact remains all 27 instruments that are listed on that sleeve, in spite of how you would prefer to classify each instrument, were played and recorded by one man and gave us our first glimpse and hint as to what the world of Prince sounds like.

that's cool, I am just trying to explain what I think they meant by myth, and that nobody's claiming it's a myth that he plays multiple instruments

the thing is that prince has written multiple hits for multiple artist. Songs like The Dance Electric, Love--thy will be Done, Nothing Compares 2 U etc. If Prince's songs only suited Prince for the most part, than these songs wouldn't have been hits IMO.

And take a look at something like "When Doves Cry". Its a brilliant song, yet i haven't seen anybody make a truly great cover version of it. Does that mean it isn't a great song? No, not at all. It is one of the best and most orignal compositions i have ever heard. So i respectfully disagree with your point Imaginative.

NDRU said:

Mindflux said:

But its still not a myth - did you see what I wrote above? Just because the OP has decided to determine that we should only classify what instruments Prince plays by taking them to their most base level (i.e. Piano or Percussion), doesn't mean that Prince only plays 4 instruments. What the OP has done is basically the same as if we were to take a trip to the zoo and someone says "Wow, look at all the hundreds of species of animals in this place" and the OP would reply "Hmm, all I see are mammals and reptiles".

You cannot say Prince plays "Percussion" and classify that as one instrument. Any musician ought to know this (unless they have only ever played one instrument themself and have no understanding or experience of playing with other musicians). If you were to make a record and on one track you played electric bass and on another you played upright, you'd be entitled to claim you have played different instruments - they may both perform the function of bass, but they are entirely different instruments to play and in how they sound.

I play percussion, but I would feel that a disservice to what I actually record. I can play full-kit, darbuka, djembe, bongo, conga, cajon, timbale, shaker all to a decent level and I dabble on tabla (though, I wouldn't say I was a competent tabla player - can hold a rhythm, but don't play them "properly"). That's 8 definite instruments that I would say I play and one I dabble in. I also play piano, synths, guitar (acoustic and electric) and bass (electric). I have no problem saying I play a dozen instruments.

That said, I don't list everything I play on my albums (its not entirely necessary) and the only time it was done that I'm aware of with Prince was for his DEBUT album which, of course, would benefit it with some hype. But.....is it really hype? Because the fact remains all 27 instruments that are listed on that sleeve, in spite of how you would prefer to classify each instrument, were played and recorded by one man and gave us our first glimpse and hint as to what the world of Prince sounds like.

that's cool, I am just trying to explain what I think they meant by myth, and that nobody's claiming it's a myth that he plays multiple instruments

Duly noted...tis all good bro

I find it wierd that people are comparing Prince black music to the white music of the Beatles and Dylan. Prince is inspired by alot of white music, but is alot more black when it comes to his roots. He might have some Joni Mitchell, Bob Dylan, Gary Numan, David Bowie and such... but the other list is a hell of alot longer. His first albums were very disco oriented. Even his rock songs were mixed like disco almost. His roots is alot more blues, jazz, funk, disco, soul, and rnb, much more than classical, prog, folk, country. He used Clare Fisher for orchestra and worked with musicians with more of that background for inspiration and help. So how he builds a song will mostly have roots in western african, rathern than the western european. His music is syncopated, has attitude and is usually not very dynamic. European music is alot more based on melody and dynamic. Since alot of Prince fans have roots in western european music, they'll always compare it to these musicians.

People with bakground in classical music are often ignorant to the art of repetitive music. Prince music has mostly been very repetitive. His "dynamic" is in small suprices here and there throughout a repetetive song. It's his art of putting together the most simple drum pattern, and making it sound like it really was meant to be.

Many live musicians are also ignorant to the art of sampling and drum programming. Many don't see the art in this. Fact is, it creates a totally different vibe. If you study Prince, you'd know that he's not using drum machines because he sucks at playing the drums. He is using it because it does something no drummer can duplicate. A totally different sound. It's also a hell of alot easier to mix programmed drums. Sound fuller and thicker. This lead also to a very different use of the bass guitar and the rest of the arrangement. Prince was now able to make sounds pop more out in the mix.

hhhhdmt said:

the thing is that prince has written multiple hits for multiple artist. Songs like The Dance Electric, Love--thy will be Done, Nothing Compares 2 U etc. If Prince's songs only suited Prince for the most part, than these songs wouldn't have been hits IMO.

And take a look at something like "When Doves Cry". Its a brilliant song, yet i haven't seen anybody make a truly great cover version of it. Does that mean it isn't a great song? No, not at all. It is one of the best and most orignal compositions i have ever heard. So i respectfully disagree with your point Imaginative.

"the thing is that prince has written multiple hits for multiple artist. Songs like The Dance Electric, Love--thy will be Done, Nothing Compares 2 U etc. If Prince's songs only suited Prince for the most part, than these songs wouldn't have been hits IMO." I disagree. As I said above, no matter who records them; The Family, The Time, Sinead, etc., it sound like Prince. Most were hits because they sound like really good Prince, and people love Prince, for good reason.

"And take a look at something like "When Doves Cry". Its a brilliant song, yet i haven't seen anybody make a truly great cover version of it. Does that mean it isn't a great song?" I disagree again. It's a great RECORD. It's not a "great song," until and unless it transcends the artist who wrote it.

With respect.

Imaginative said:

I remember hearing throughout the 80's things like, "Prince can play 40 instruments!" However, having seen him numerous times in concert and listened to virtually all of the records, and countless live bootlegs, I can safely say I have only heard or seen him play four instruments; guitar, bass, piano and percussion. Out of these four, his is virtuoso on one (guitar), very good at another, but in only one particular style (funk on electric bass), and adequate on the remaining two, piano and percussion (although he is an excellent drum programmer).

Prince is fantastic and I love his music (why do I feel I always need to say that around here?), but his greatest strengths are as a guitarist, composer/arranger and of course, as a live act. Playing four instruments--in particular, those four--is not really such a rarity in pop/rock music. I can name several artists who are even virtuoso in more than one area (i.e. Stevie Wonder on piano, Clavinova, harmonica, and vocals. Also an excellent drummer).

So where is this multi-instrumentalist everyone talks about? I want to hear Prince wail on a trumpet solo, or play a wicked violin part!

[Edited 6/12/11 19:32pm]

I dreamed about this thread before I knew it existed. Yes it is true...he does not play 40 instruments. I'd put it at a dozen or less. A guitar is a guitar...a drum is a drum...a computerized keyboard can take the place of a dozen instruments.

don't get me wrong...dude is mad skilled but he don't play the harp nor the tuba!

well we will have to agree to disagree then. I think most people consider WDC a great song, but then again people have different opinions. As far as i am concerned, prince has written many great songs regardless of whether people have made good cover versions of it or not.

Back to the original topic, I went into this thread disagreeing with hype over how many instruments Prince plays. I always thought it was ridiculous to list different keyboard brands as different instruments, but maybe (just maybe) there's an argument for this.

Back in the pre-MIDI and computer driven era when "For You" was recorded, it was a bear to set-up and control many of those primative analog synths. Programming could be difficult and the sound they generated could certainly affect your playing style. So in 2011 it seems silly to list the MiniMoog, Fairlight CMI and Oberheim 2 Voice as separate instuments, but it's really not the same as listing a Telecaster and Gibson Les Paul as different instuments in terms of learning to master creating music on them.

Now if Prince was using a synth programmer, all this is moot...

hhhhdmt said:

well we will have to agree to disagree then. I think most people consider WDC a great song, but then again people have different opinions. As far as i am concerned, prince has written many great songs regardless of whether people have made good cover versions of it or not.

Again, I love When Doves Cry, and I think it's one of the best records of the decade. The point I was trying to make, is that unless you can look at the song outside of the context of the record, it's impossible really judge it solely as a "song," in the traditional sense.

There is a reason the Grammys have separate categories for "Song" and "Record." They are very different things.

Mindflux said:

Out of interest, what instruments do you play Trevor? I've had a listen to your music and kinda like the vibe and where its coming from.

And its because you do what you do that I find it so surprising that you get engaged in these debates siding with the whole its bullshit/he's not that talented kinda stuff. Surely, as musicians, we just go in to the studio and do what we do, be who we are? None of the musicians in your band are particularly accomplished, but you still make your music and it is appreciated by people. None of the musicians in my band are as talented as Prince and we listen to a hell of a lot of music that is "better" than ours, but it doesn't stop us either.

Hey Mindflux, thanks for checkin my tunes .. just to be clear .. i have never and would never consider prince untalented .. but i do enjoy discussing the breakdown of his talent and attempting to further understand his path and experience that put him where he is in the musical sphere .. i can understand certain specific percussion instruments being more relevant than others and I am not speaking to ALL percussion instruments, but there are certainly some, like the congas and djambe that are not a a far cry from performing on any other drum or percussive instrument .. certainly a didgeridoo would take a whole new skill set to master .. and i would agree that most people can play a chord on guitar .. but we are talking prince here and his publicity and marketing scheme depicting him as more talented than other capable musicians because he can play so many instruments .. and i stand by the notion that until he really expands his talent to capably play instruments that really move beyond the skill set of the basic 4 instruments, its a bit of a fluff piece to brag about the abundance of instruments he plays beyond the 4 ..

this is NOT me saying prince sucks or that he is untalented or that what he does do with his music is somehow a fraud .. i am simply addressing the point raised in this thread of they hype of prince as a capable performer of 27-40 instruments

i took 5 years of sax lessons .. the only instrument i did not teach myself .. and i have no problem admitting that altho i could probably bust out "u don't bring me flowers" on it, i am no saxaphone player .. i would never go around bragging about it because altho i can read music and perform ok .. i would embarrass myself if i tried to sit in with other musicians ..

i would have no problem sitting with anyone while strapped to a guitar tho .. bass is fun and easy .. keys are fun .. i am probably a little better on keys than sax .. and drums .. i've done paid shows on the drums even tho i only dabble with them as a hobby

i am not super familiar with synths altho i have a hammond organ and a couple of decent keyboards .. i don't really know the big difference in approach between an ARP Soloist to an Oberheim 4-voice, but I can say that they both employ a lot of synth affects that shape the tone and deliverence of each note .. they both have advanced affects with knobs you can adjust live to affect the sounds, giving a lot of the sounds sort of a sci fi movie effects feel .. but the fact remains .. the sound effects, in my mind anyway, fall more in the production category .. i mean i suppose i could say i was playing a different instrument than guitar every time i hit my flange, wah wah, or delay pedal .. but i'm not .. its still the guitar that is making the song .. and while the effects are interesting and may even be the highlight of the song at times .. its not a different instrument .. i take the same approach when classifying keyboards, piano, organ, synths .. yes a piano is more percussive .. an organ sounds better with long drawn out notes .. a synth can sound like a fuckin lazer gun .. but its still basically a piano .. and the effects do not make a song on their own .. they need the musical instrument .. the piano part of the synth .. to function in the context of a song

i have absolute respect for prince as a studio wiz .. and some might argue that the studio itself is an instrument and i might agree .. but if we are gonna count up instruments i think prince would earn more respect if those instruments were significantly different than each other .. and if we don't define boundaries of qualification we might as well say prince plays a thousand instruments .. and that i do too

Imaginative said:

hhhhdmt said:

well we will have to agree to disagree then. I think most people consider WDC a great song, but then again people have different opinions. As far as i am concerned, prince has written many great songs regardless of whether people have made good cover versions of it or not.

Again, I love When Doves Cry, and I think it's one of the best records of the decade. The point I was trying to make, is that unless you can look at the song outside of the context of the record, it's impossible really judge it solely as a "song," in the traditional sense.

There is a reason the Grammys have separate categories for "Song" and "Record." They are very different things.

Ironically I just posted the same point in a thread touting Prince as a "poet"...

TrevorAyer said:

Mindflux said:

Out of interest, what instruments do you play Trevor? I've had a listen to your music and kinda like the vibe and where its coming from.

And its because you do what you do that I find it so surprising that you get engaged in these debates siding with the whole its bullshit/he's not that talented kinda stuff. Surely, as musicians, we just go in to the studio and do what we do, be who we are? None of the musicians in your band are particularly accomplished, but you still make your music and it is appreciated by people. None of the musicians in my band are as talented as Prince and we listen to a hell of a lot of music that is "better" than ours, but it doesn't stop us either.

Hey Mindflux, thanks for checkin my tunes .. just to be clear .. i have never and would never consider prince untalented .. but i do enjoy discussing the breakdown of his talent and attempting to further understand his path and experience that put him where he is in the musical sphere .. i can understand certain specific percussion instruments being more relevant than others and I am not speaking to ALL percussion instruments, but there are certainly some, like the congas and djambe that are not a a far cry from performing on any other drum or percussive instrument .. certainly a didgeridoo would take a whole new skill set to master .. and i would agree that most people can play a chord on guitar .. but we are talking prince here and his publicity and marketing scheme depicting him as more talented than other capable musicians because he can play so many instruments .. and i stand by the notion that until he really expands his talent to capably play instruments that really move beyond the skill set of the basic 4 instruments, its a bit of a fluff piece to brag about the abundance of instruments he plays beyond the 4 ..

this is NOT me saying prince sucks or that he is untalented or that what he does do with his music is somehow a fraud .. i am simply addressing the point raised in this thread of they hype of prince as a capable performer of 27-40 instruments

i took 5 years of sax lessons .. the only instrument i did not teach myself .. and i have no problem admitting that altho i could probably bust out "u don't bring me flowers" on it, i am no saxaphone player .. i would never go around bragging about it because altho i can read music and perform ok .. i would embarrass myself if i tried to sit in with other musicians ..

i would have no problem sitting with anyone while strapped to a guitar tho .. bass is fun and easy .. keys are fun .. i am probably a little better on keys than sax .. and drums .. i've done paid shows on the drums even tho i only dabble with them as a hobby

i am not super familiar with synths altho i have a hammond organ and a couple of decent keyboards .. i don't really know the big difference in approach between an ARP Soloist to an Oberheim 4-voice, but I can say that they both employ a lot of synth affects that shape the tone and deliverence of each note .. they both have advanced affects with knobs you can adjust live to affect the sounds, giving a lot of the sounds sort of a sci fi movie effects feel .. but the fact remains .. the sound effects, in my mind anyway, fall more in the production category .. i mean i suppose i could say i was playing a different instrument than guitar every time i hit my flange, wah wah, or delay pedal .. but i'm not .. its still the guitar that is making the song .. and while the effects are interesting and may even be the highlight of the song at times .. its not a different instrument .. i take the same approach when classifying keyboards, piano, organ, synths .. yes a piano is more percussive .. an organ sounds better with long drawn out notes .. a synth can sound like a fuckin lazer gun .. but its still basically a piano .. and the effects do not make a song on their own .. they need the musical instrument .. the piano part of the synth .. to function in the context of a song

i have absolute respect for prince as a studio wiz .. and some might argue that the studio itself is an instrument and i might agree .. but if we are gonna count up instruments i think prince would earn more respect if those instruments were significantly different than each other .. and if we don't define boundaries of qualification we might as well say prince plays a thousand instruments .. and that i do too

Let's say the studio is his fifth instrument it's no doubt that his production and way of putting the instruments together is one of his biggest strengths. Imo his biggest strengt. That is also what's making it seem like he's a better instrumentalist. Because he is producing his instruments very well. His way of playing an instrument to perfectly fit the rest og the arrangement.

njin said:

People with bakground in classical music are often ignorant to the art of repetitive music.

Uh. No. That's so wrong.

You can't be classically trained and not have some grasp of repetition.

Also your characterization of repetitive music as Black music isn't entirely accurate either. I'd hate to get into a debate between African tribal music and say, Gregorian chants.... but let's just agree there are age old traditions that used repetition in every culture's music. If you think repetition only exists in soul, funk, hip hop.... and not in working class garage rock, or electro-accoustic, or disco, wellllll......

Then there's a tradition of marrying the two...and that's where Prince thrived. It wasn't "race music" to use an antiquated term.

Graycap23 said:

ufoclub said:

Just listen to "Wild Honey Pie"

then listen to "Oh Darling"

then "Temporary Secretary"

then "Get Back"

the reggae break in "Live and Let Die"

then any orchestral track off of "Ecce Cor Meum"

check out this WIRED article about the dance/electronic influence of the Beatles (1966) track "Tomorrow Never Knows" http://www.wired.com/unde...ver-knows/

[Edited 6/16/11 8:08am]

I just listened 2 all of these tracks......other than Live and Let Die, I can't stand and will NEVER listen 2 these tracks agian in life.

U think these tracks are good?

Well, I'm glad you at least liked liked "Live and Let Die"! Beats the Guns n Roses cover by MILES.

Different people have different tastes. A lot of people can't stand the basic sound of Prince's voice even if they like the music. A lot of people think the melodies of "Take Me With You" and "Computer Blue" are retarded and unmoving.

Check out these two McCartney songs:

"You Never Give Me Your Money" (I personally think this is one of the most remarkable melodic songs I've ever heard thorugh all it's twists)

"Maybe I'm Amazed" (One of the most powerful epic ballads both the studio and the live version)

Instruments we know Prince plays (maybe not competently):

Saxaphone (Dulfer even commented on listening to studio recording of him in sax)

Harmonica (who can't play it?)

Tablas

Finger cymbals (he went crazy with those in 1984-85)

Tambourine (He even wrote a song about playing it. wait a minute)

Two perc sticks (I have actually seen him play two percussion sticks at an aftershow in Miami)

Scissors (listen to that track on Kamasutra or to the really attentive... Bob George)

Harmonium (it's just a little flexible piano, right?)

cowbell

I know we want him to stop playing that magical percussion thing of long metal rods... what's it called?

ufoclub said:

Graycap23 said:

I just listened 2 all of these tracks......other than Live and Let Die, I can't stand and will NEVER listen 2 these tracks agian in life.

U think these tracks are good?

Well, I'm glad you at least liked liked "Live and Let Die"! Beats the Guns n Roses cover by MILES.

Different people have different tastes. A lot of people can't stand the basic sound of Prince's voice even if they like the music. A lot of people think the melodies of "Take Me With You" and "Computer Blue" are retarded and unmoving.

Check out these two McCartney songs:

"You Never Give Me Your Money" (I personally think this is one of the most remarkable melodic songs I've ever heard thorugh all it's twists)

"Maybe I'm Amazed" (One of the most powerful epic ballads both the studio and the live version)

After listening 2 the example songs that u recommended...........it's laughable that folks think the Beatles influenced styles like R&B, Funk, etc.........and quite sad as well.

Why would you recommend Wild Honey Pie to someone who does not like McCartney?

This is the one song that (to me) could be compared to Prince. It's pretty light, but it's a little bit funky and it's a tight one-man recording with horn lines etc.

And the video is a cute concept with Paul playing all the parts in characters from bands he likes, years before Andre 3000 did it.

[Edited 6/16/11 13:00pm]

but don't get me wrong, I don't think paul can touch prince as a pure instrumentalist, and I am not saying he is an influence on funk (with the possible exception of some of Parliament's more psychedelic leanings--not the music itself)

He has different strengths, plus he is of a previous generation, before he & Stevie made it a more commonplace practice

[Edited 6/16/11 13:05pm]

NDRU said:

Why would you recommend Wild Honey Pie to someone who does not like McCartney?

This is the one song that (to me) could be compared to Prince. It's pretty light, but it's a little bit funky and it's a tight one-man recording with horn lines etc.

And the video is a cute concept with Paul playing all the parts in characters from bands he likes, years before Andre 3000 did it.

[Edited 6/16/11 13:00pm]

"Wild Honey Pie" shows range and creativity insanity, I mean what genre is it? "hillbilly lunatic"? I enjoy making diverse professional music myself so my take on what impresses me is usually creative mastery with no bounds to limits of taste or convention, yet still within the pop structure.

Prince has "Everybody Loves Me" more recently that hits the spot.

ufoclub said:

NDRU said:

Why would you recommend Wild Honey Pie to someone who does not like McCartney?

This is the one song that (to me) could be compared to Prince. It's pretty light, but it's a little bit funky and it's a tight one-man recording with horn lines etc.

And the video is a cute concept with Paul playing all the parts in characters from bands he likes, years before Andre 3000 did it.

[Edited 6/16/11 13:00pm]

"Wild Honey Pie" shows range and creativity insanity, I mean what genre is it? "hillbilly lunatic"? I enjoy making diverse professional music myself so my take on what impresses me is usually creative mastery with no bounds to limits of taste or convention, yet still within the pop structure.

Prince has "Everybody Loves Me" more recently that hits the spot.

I get what you're saying (it's an interesting experiment) but I don't see it changing any minds. More likely, reinforcing their dislike.

After listening 2 the example songs that u recommended...........it's laughable that folks think the Beatles influenced styles like R&B, Funk, etc.........and quite sad as well.

If I were limited to listening to strictly one or two styles of music and didn't see the big picture; that beautiful music comes from everywhere and ALL OF IT is connected, well, I would be sad as well. To those who understand music, your statements boil down to, "I don't see what flour has anything to do with a cookie!"

I don't know how old you are, or what level of education you have, but it's clear that musically speaking, you are a baby... and sadder yet, one that is apparently content not to grow.

[Edited 6/16/11 13:30pm]

Graycap23 said:

ufoclub said:

Well, I'm glad you at least liked liked "Live and Let Die"! Beats the Guns n Roses cover by MILES.

Different people have different tastes. A lot of people can't stand the basic sound of Prince's voice even if they like the music. A lot of people think the melodies of "Take Me With You" and "Computer Blue" are retarded and unmoving.

Check out these two McCartney songs:

"You Never Give Me Your Money" (I personally think this is one of the most remarkable melodic songs I've ever heard thorugh all it's twists)

"Maybe I'm Amazed" (One of the most powerful epic ballads both the studio and the live version)

After listening 2 the example songs that u recommended...........it's laughable that folks think the Beatles influenced styles like R&B, Funk, etc.........and quite sad as well.

I don't think you understand, The Beatles did not influence those established styles, they made they're own style out of combining the influences and did them in a way that was more interesting and addictive then ANY OTHER MUSICAL GROUP IN HISTORY. And they have the most varied popular sound of any popular group in history. The arrangements, the transcribed melodies, the sales, the charts, and all the covers of their material by the musicnas you favor (including Prince himself covering their songs) all prove this.

I can't think of anyone who has come up with a better sequence of varied pop melody and structure then "You Never Give Me Your Money"? Can you name one suitelike song that is better?

But it boils down to your mind's ability to interpret musical patterns and into drama or pleasure.

the easiest way to figure out your idea of music is to listen to the music you make up... do you make music? It's seriously the best way to figure out someone's perception of the abstract concept of music. Personally in some of your list of genres above, things like House don't even register emotionally with me at all. I don't think it's creative in the least to put out track after track with that sound.

ufoclub said:

Graycap23 said:

After listening 2 the example songs that u recommended...........it's laughable that folks think the Beatles influenced styles like R&B, Funk, etc.........and quite sad as well.

I don't think you understand,(1) The Beatles did not influence those established styles,

I can't think of anyone who has come up with a better sequence of varied pop melody and structure then "You Never Give Me Your Money"? Can you name one suitelike song that is better?

But it boils down to your mind's ability to interpret musical patterns and into drama or pleasure.

the easiest way to figure out your idea of music is to listen to the music you make up... (2)do you make music?

1. I know this........but it seems quite a few folks don't.

2. U are joking right?

Graycap23 said:

ufoclub said:

I don't think you understand,(1) The Beatles did not influence those established styles,

I can't think of anyone who has come up with a better sequence of varied pop melody and structure then "You Never Give Me Your Money"? Can you name one suitelike song that is better?

But it boils down to your mind's ability to interpret musical patterns and into drama or pleasure.

the easiest way to figure out your idea of music is to listen to the music you make up... (2)do you make music?

1. I know this........but it seems quite a few folks don't.

2. U are joking right?

Joking about what? I don't remember if you do music. It's hard to keep track of people on here, because they are not real people I interact with in life.

You still don't get it, Greycap Jones. The Beatles influenced MUSIC. Thier influence goes beyond style and genre. To say that they did not influence Funk or R&B (Mr. Stevie Wonder would surely disagree with you) is not grasping the big picture. As much as you would like it to, music does not live in little neighborhoods that are unaware of the other.

As a matter of fact, any SERIOUS artist or musician will be constantly looking outside of their chosen milieu for influences. It's pretty much the only way for an artist to grow.

Graycap23 said:

ufoclub said:

I don't think you understand,(1) The Beatles did not influence those established styles,

[Edited 6/16/11 13:43pm]

renato neto's playing is about as sexy as a root canal