themend said:

databank said:

Thx for the thoughtful reply. To be honest I'm often pushing it a little when posting on the org. Because certain people are themselves more idiotic here that they are -I assume- IRL, I overplay my character sometimes, sorry it was offensive to you.

I guess deep down we agree yes. it's certain that my enthusiasm isn't half what it was 25 years ago: the time I spend listening to new Prince releases or boots isn't what it used to be, if only because I listen to many more other things. My interest, though, hasn't waned a bit.

To be honest there have been certain people here whom I feel legit to call impstors. Not you, I actually wasn't thinking or talking about you when I originally posted in this thread. But there's been certain people who've done nothing but bashing and degrading Prince's music or Prince as a person for the last 15 or 20 years. I've also met certain fans who hadn't a clue of what Prince's work meant on a deeper level. I mean you may be talking about David Lynch's movies or Milan Kundera's books with someone and realize even though they've watched/read them, they don't have the smallest clue of what they're about. I believe certain people were somehow lifted by certain Prince albums, the way I may be lifted by certain works by David Bowie or David Sylvian (to take those 2 examples) while I am relatively indifferent to some others. I do not claim I have a deep understanding of their artistic approach and despite having all their records, I wouldn't call myself a fan of their work, because a great part of it eludes me. And more impoirtantly I wouldn't disrespect those works by them I do not really adhere to, because I'm sure if I'd make the effort to get into their work and try and understand it, I'd realize its significance as a whole instead of naively believing my tastes are some kind of universal value of reference.

"Databank" is, in many aspects, the monster created by some of the most stupidest orgers over the last 15 years. Their assumed and proud stupidity called for some sort of retaliation. And I assumed that role. Apologies if you felt targeted. And while only mods have the legitimate right to "allow" people to be orgers, I believe 16 years as a member of this community gives me (and others) a certain legitimacy in speaking out loud who I believe are contributing members and who are nuisances. Most boards usually have a tacit rule that elder members have such legitimacy and new members usually try and respect that. I certainly do when I post on another board.

Sincerely, thank you for your thoughtful response too. It's really not like me to get involved and emotional about these things, so your reply has made made me smile and relieved me.

Sadly many fans and even the media are stuck in the 80s.

.

The Prince period 2012 to 2016 is epic.

.

He was in an amazing groove and I was so excited to see where he would go next, but sadly that stopped.

.

When i call it a "narrative" for Prince to be having a "tragic" decline, he is not nearly alone in how critics look at artists. Richard Pryor has a common narrative where he is completely written off after his burn incident and after he disavowed the n-word. It's a simple theory, after his tragic burning and his swearing off the n-word he is a different man. It's not really true but it's nice and neat. I can recall, although I was young, that Richard was never more popular, never more accepted than he was after his burn incident. Most of his movies got rave reviews for at least a few years and it wasn't until the late 80's where the talk of his artistic decline, culminating in his horribly reviewed but wonderful semi-autobiographical movie Jo Jo Dancer came out. His audience got tired of him, it's pretty simple. Then of course he really did get sick with MS and of course he couldn't function after that but that's a different story.

I think a lot of it is ageism combined with Prince's stubbornness and lack of direction in the 90's. . the music industry is the most ageist form of show business there is (or any art for that matter.) Actors are allowed to age (at least to some extent.) Meryl Streep, Al Pacino, Morgan Freeman, Susan Sarandon, Denzel Washington, Day-Lewis...all working in their 50's, 60's and beyond. Painters aren't valued on their age or if they reach young audiences. Authors don't lose their popularity after 30. The youth movement for all its pro's had some cons..one amongst them being the lack of interest in the music listening public in letting their musicians grow and evolve and the tendency to trap them in amber as young 'edgy' artists.

Seriously, can you think of one recording artist who people think is still relevent after 40? Madonna briefly but she has since then lost her popularity. I am not talking about well-made albums made by Bowie, Paul Simon, Paul McCartney that a handful of critics toss accolades at. I am talking about in pop culture. The narrative is that older musicans have nothing of importance to convey and add to the table. So, people just idolize their older work and mostly ignore their newer stuff (unless they die or like Johnny Cash make surprising decisions to remake younger artists music. There is a reason why older artists are constantly dueting with younger ones.

Prince had many strikes against him. He hit his mid-30, he changed his name to a undecipherable symbol for reasons that most people didn't understand or appreciate, he sucked at promotion or letting WB do it for him, his music had become super eclectic, hip hop took over everything...this started the spiral down in terms of the general public perspective's of his work as a whole and some lazy critics acceptance of his work. People didn't have the time to search through his massive catalog and didn't realize that even though half of his songs on one album might be sub par compared to his earlier work, in the next year another album would come out and between the two albums you could compile an album (or 1 1/2 albums) of quality songs in less time than it took most artists to make one mediocre album. The other problem seemed to be that Prince was bad at picking which songs to release from his albums...I mean--Come on, picking "My Name is Prince" over "And God Created Women"?WTF? Or Get off first before "Money Don't Matter Tonight", or burying The truth and Gold Experience in limited release. So this soured people who probably just assumed that half the Love Symbol Album was shit songs like My name is Prince and didn't buy Prince doing anything remotely hip hop. In retrospect, some of the rap-like music sounds kind of fresh to me these days. Get Off's use of flute?--love it.

I think the ageism really kicked in in the 2000's for Prince. (And it wasn't helped by his religious conversion.) His live work kept him around but mostly as a talented relic for those who tuned into the superbowl to hear Purple Rain and impressive covers of Foo Fighters and Hendrix.

Yes, the albums Musicology and 3121 sold well (and AOA didn't sell to bad.) But there were no hit songs or radio play. Older artists don't get hit singles. And what else blows my mind is that Timberlake can put out an album that resembles 3121 in its electro-funk sound 8 months after Prince's album and Timberlake gets the hit singles. Adele can sing songs that sound like they were written and sung by a 50 year old soul singer, but because she is young and dare I say "White", she is a massive success.Young musicians steal older sounds or are considered derivative throwbacks but they can pull it off because they are young and people admire their knowledge of older styles. Someone from that era releasing music nearly identical will just be called a relic. One of the reasons I never took to Lenny Kravitz (despite his looks and skills) is that Are you going to go my way was so damn derivative. But that song was a big success at time. If a 6o's rocker, released the same song, no one would care.

PeteSilas said:

When i call it a "narrative" for Prince to be having a "tragic" decline, he is not nearly alone in how critics look at artists. Richard Pryor has a common narrative where he is completely written off after his burn incident and after he disavowed the n-word. It's a simple theory, after his tragic burning and his swearing off the n-word he is a different man. It's not really true but it's nice and neat. I can recall, although I was young, that Richard was never more popular, never more accepted than he was after his burn incident. Most of his movies got rave reviews for at least a few years and it wasn't until the late 80's where the talk of his artistic decline, culminating in his horribly reviewed but wonderful semi-autobiographical movie Jo Jo Dancer came out. His audience got tired of him, it's pretty simple. Then of course he really did get sick with MS and of course he couldn't function after that but that's a different story.

[Edited 2/11/17 23:13pm]

[Edited 2/11/17 23:15pm]

[Edited 2/11/17 23:20pm]

purplerabbithole said:

I think a lot of it is ageism combined with Prince's stubbornness and lack of direction in the 90's. . the music industry is the most ageist form of show business there is (or any art for that matter.) Actors are allowed to age (at least to some extent.) Meryl Streep, Al Pacino, Morgan Freeman, Susan Sarandon, Denzel Washington, Day-Lewis...all working in their 50's, 60's and beyond. Painters aren't valued on their age or if they reach young audiences. Authors don't lose their popularity after 30. The youth movement for all its pro's had some cons..one amongst them being the lack of interest in the music listening public in letting their musicians grow and evolve and the tendency to trap them in amber as young 'edgy' artists.

Seriously, can you think of one recording artist who people think is still relevent after 40? Madonna briefly but she has since then lost her popularity. I am not talking about well-made albums made by Bowie, Paul Simon, Paul McCartney that a handful of critics toss accolades at. I am talking about in pop culture. The narrative is that older musicans have nothing of importance to convey and add to the table. So, people just idolize their older work and mostly ignore their newer stuff (unless they die or like Johnny Cash make surprising decisions to remake younger artists music. There is a reason why older artists are constantly dueting with younger ones.

Prince had many strikes against him. He hit his mid-30, he changed his name to a undecipherable symbol for reasons that most people didn't understand or appreciate, he sucked at promotion or letting WB do it for him, his music had become super eclectic, hip hop took over everything...this started the spiral down in terms of the general public perspective's of his work as a whole and some lazy critics acceptance of his work. People didn't have the time to search through his massive catalog and didn't realize that even though half of his songs on one album might be sub par compared to his earlier work, in the next year another album would come out and between the two albums you could compile an album (or 1 1/2 albums) of quality songs in less time than it took most artists to make one mediocre album. The other problem seemed to be that Prince was bad at picking which songs to release from his albums...I mean--Come on, picking "My Name is Prince" over "And God Created Women"?WTF? Or Get off first before "Money Don't Matter Tonight", or burying The truth and Gold Experience in limited release. So this soured people who probably just assumed that half the Love Symbol Album was shit songs like My name is Prince and didn't buy Prince doing anything remotely hip hop. In retrospect, some of the rap-like music sounds kind of fresh to me these days. Get Off's use of flute?--love it.

I think the ageism really kicked in in the 2000's for Prince. (And it wasn't helped by his religious conversion.) His live work kept him around but mostly as a talented relic for those who tuned into the superbowl to hear Purple Rain and impressive covers of Foo Fighters and Hendrix.

Yes, the albums Musicology and 3121 sold well (and AOA didn't sell to bad.) But there were no hit songs or radio play. Older artists don't get hit singles. And what else blows my mind is that Timberlake can put out an album that resembles 3121 in its electro-funk sound 8 months after Prince's album and Timberlake gets the hit singles. Adele can sing songs that sound like they were written and sung by a 50 year old soul singer, but because she is young and dare I say "White", she is a massive success.Young musicians steal older sounds or are considered derivative throwbacks but they can pull it off because they are young and people admire their knowledge of older styles. Someone from that era releasing music nearly identical will just be called a relic. One of the reasons I never took to Lenny Kravitz (despite his looks and skills) is that Are you going to go my way was so damn derivative. But that song was a big success at time. If a 6o's rocker, released the same song, no one would care.

PeteSilas said:

When i call it a "narrative" for Prince to be having a "tragic" decline, he is not nearly alone in how critics look at artists. Richard Pryor has a common narrative where he is completely written off after his burn incident and after he disavowed the n-word. It's a simple theory, after his tragic burning and his swearing off the n-word he is a different man. It's not really true but it's nice and neat. I can recall, although I was young, that Richard was never more popular, never more accepted than he was after his burn incident. Most of his movies got rave reviews for at least a few years and it wasn't until the late 80's where the talk of his artistic decline, culminating in his horribly reviewed but wonderful semi-autobiographical movie Jo Jo Dancer came out. His audience got tired of him, it's pretty simple. Then of course he really did get sick with MS and of course he couldn't function after that but that's a different story.

[Edited 2/11/17 23:13pm]

[Edited 2/11/17 23:15pm]

[Edited 2/11/17 23:20pm]

your absolutely right about most of the artists you mention. Madonna, I don't know much about past the Like a Prayer album, I still can't believe my dumb young as even went to her concert. And yes, it's not just Prince, I thought Paul Simons Songs From The Capeman was one of the greatest albums I'd heard in a while and no one listened. So, you can't blame the artist, Paul gave some gems on that album and no one gave them a chance. I can't change that but I'm glad I'm not like that, never was, from the time I wanted to be a musician, I knew it was wise to be wide open to everyone, that Little Richard the "oldie" deserved as much if not more respect than the current starts Prince and MJ. That high you can get off of a great piece, it can really come from anywhere, so when people put limits on where they look for it, especially when they look in one of the places where that high is given the least importance, I just really can't respect that.

PeteSilas said:

purplerabbithole said:

I think a lot of it is ageism combined with Prince's stubbornness and lack of direction in the 90's. . the music industry is the most ageist form of show business there is (or any art for that matter.) Actors are allowed to age (at least to some extent.) Meryl Streep, Al Pacino, Morgan Freeman, Susan Sarandon, Denzel Washington, Day-Lewis...all working in their 50's, 60's and beyond. Painters aren't valued on their age or if they reach young audiences. Authors don't lose their popularity after 30. The youth movement for all its pro's had some cons..one amongst them being the lack of interest in the music listening public in letting their musicians grow and evolve and the tendency to trap them in amber as young 'edgy' artists.

Seriously, can you think of one recording artist who people think is still relevent after 40? Madonna briefly but she has since then lost her popularity. I am not talking about well-made albums made by Bowie, Paul Simon, Paul McCartney that a handful of critics toss accolades at. I am talking about in pop culture. The narrative is that older musicans have nothing of importance to convey and add to the table. So, people just idolize their older work and mostly ignore their newer stuff (unless they die or like Johnny Cash make surprising decisions to remake younger artists music. There is a reason why older artists are constantly dueting with younger ones.

Prince had many strikes against him. He hit his mid-30, he changed his name to a undecipherable symbol for reasons that most people didn't understand or appreciate, he sucked at promotion or letting WB do it for him, his music had become super eclectic, hip hop took over everything...this started the spiral down in terms of the general public perspective's of his work as a whole and some lazy critics acceptance of his work. People didn't have the time to search through his massive catalog and didn't realize that even though half of his songs on one album might be sub par compared to his earlier work, in the next year another album would come out and between the two albums you could compile an album (or 1 1/2 albums) of quality songs in less time than it took most artists to make one mediocre album. The other problem seemed to be that Prince was bad at picking which songs to release from his albums...I mean--Come on, picking "My Name is Prince" over "And God Created Women"?WTF? Or Get off first before "Money Don't Matter Tonight", or burying The truth and Gold Experience in limited release. So this soured people who probably just assumed that half the Love Symbol Album was shit songs like My name is Prince and didn't buy Prince doing anything remotely hip hop. In retrospect, some of the rap-like music sounds kind of fresh to me these days. Get Off's use of flute?--love it.

I think the ageism really kicked in in the 2000's for Prince. (And it wasn't helped by his religious conversion.) His live work kept him around but mostly as a talented relic for those who tuned into the superbowl to hear Purple Rain and impressive covers of Foo Fighters and Hendrix.

Yes, the albums Musicology and 3121 sold well (and AOA didn't sell to bad.) But there were no hit songs or radio play. Older artists don't get hit singles. And what else blows my mind is that Timberlake can put out an album that resembles 3121 in its electro-funk sound 8 months after Prince's album and Timberlake gets the hit singles. Adele can sing songs that sound like they were written and sung by a 50 year old soul singer, but because she is young and dare I say "White", she is a massive success.Young musicians steal older sounds or are considered derivative throwbacks but they can pull it off because they are young and people admire their knowledge of older styles. Someone from that era releasing music nearly identical will just be called a relic. One of the reasons I never took to Lenny Kravitz (despite his looks and skills) is that Are you going to go my way was so damn derivative. But that song was a big success at time. If a 6o's rocker, released the same song, no one would care.

[Edited 2/11/17 23:13pm]

[Edited 2/11/17 23:15pm]

[Edited 2/11/17 23:20pm]

your absolutely right about most of the artists you mention. Madonna, I don't know much about past the Like a Prayer album, I still can't believe my dumb young as even went to her concert.

Madonna kept releasing great, sophisticated pop up to at least 2005, I'd even say her 1990-2005 records are probably better than the 80's ones. Beginning with Hard Candy and particularly with the last 2 albums, I feel her sound was too much trying to emulate young idols and began to seriously lack sophistication. On the other hand she's always been chasing trends so maybe I'm just getting too old to associate myself with those sounds, IDK. But overall Madonna has found an impressive balance between being at the same time a hipsters' favorite and a mass entertainer.

purplerabbithole said:

Or Get off first before "Money Don't Matter Tonight",

I found the release of Gett Off an interesting move at the time. The single received virtually no promotion, at least in France IDK in the US, it went underground and Cream was the "first" D&P single for most people, with massive promo from WB and massive airplay from radios and TV. Gett Off, to me, was Prince sending a message to fans and hipsters, like "I'm gonna go real mainstream and have a huge hit with this cheesy ballade titled D&P, this slightly provocative but super generic song titled Cream, and finish the run with this politically aware but safe R&B track titled MDM2, and I'm gonna have rappers on my songs just like everybody else, but I want you guys to know I'm still the freak you used to love, I'm not becoming Lionel Ritchie or Phil Collins".

The choice of singles from Symbol was more hazardous, but the whole album was an adventure: it was way too conceptual or sophisticated for the masses and the fact that it sold as it did remains quite awesome at the end of the day.

if he hadnt KTU'd certain songs from Hit N Run phase One ...they wouldve been better

Its up to individuals, peers, spouses, etc... to either dig deeper into P's catalog or share it with others. I dont get why P's overall catalog doesnt receive more love, but I understand it. I have tried, for many years, to get into Dylan because he is so beloved....but it hasnt worked. Outside of Highway 61, I could take or leave virtually every other Dylan album ever made. One of my mini goals in life to experience as much music as possible to expand my horizons/knowledge of all of the most well respected artists....across many genres. I have been traveling through Rolling Stone's top 500 albums of all time list and to assist in this endeavor. It has been a tremendous experience and opened my eyes to many other brilliant artists that I wouldntve even given a shot back in the day.......except for Dylan, he is still wildly overrated.

you better go and see stevie while you can.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

PeteSilas said:

that's a great comparison. Even after the man died people are still talking the same shit.

those of us that spent most of the last 30+ listing to Prince are rich! we are spoiled. I am not sure I would ever go to another concert (On my own)... and I was offered tickets to a Prince cover band... and I was so happy that I could not go. I did not want to be rude! but no...

interesting reading..

purplerabbithole said:

I think a lot of it is ageism combined with Prince's stubbornness and lack of direction in the 90's. . the music industry is the most ageist form of show business there is (or any art for that matter.) Actors are allowed to age (at least to some extent.) Meryl Streep, Al Pacino, Morgan Freeman, Susan Sarandon, Denzel Washington, Day-Lewis...all working in their 50's, 60's and beyond. Painters aren't valued on their age or if they reach young audiences. Authors don't lose their popularity after 30. The youth movement for all its pro's had some cons..one amongst them being the lack of interest in the music listening public in letting their musicians grow and evolve and the tendency to trap them in amber as young 'edgy' artists.

Seriously, can you think of one recording artist who people think is still relevent after 40? Madonna briefly but she has since then lost her popularity. I am not talking about well-made albums made by Bowie, Paul Simon, Paul McCartney that a handful of critics toss accolades at. I am talking about in pop culture. The narrative is that older musicans have nothing of importance to convey and add to the table. So, people just idolize their older work and mostly ignore their newer stuff (unless they die or like Johnny Cash make surprising decisions to remake younger artists music. There is a reason why older artists are constantly dueting with younger ones.

Prince had many strikes against him. He hit his mid-30, he changed his name to a undecipherable symbol for reasons that most people didn't understand or appreciate, he sucked at promotion or letting WB do it for him, his music had become super eclectic, hip hop took over everything...this started the spiral down in terms of the general public perspective's of his work as a whole and some lazy critics acceptance of his work. People didn't have the time to search through his massive catalog and didn't realize that even though half of his songs on one album might be sub par compared to his earlier work, in the next year another album would come out and between the two albums you could compile an album (or 1 1/2 albums) of quality songs in less time than it took most artists to make one mediocre album. The other problem seemed to be that Prince was bad at picking which songs to release from his albums...I mean--Come on, picking "My Name is Prince" over "And God Created Women"?WTF? Or Get off first before "Money Don't Matter Tonight", or burying The truth and Gold Experience in limited release. So this soured people who probably just assumed that half the Love Symbol Album was shit songs like My name is Prince and didn't buy Prince doing anything remotely hip hop. In retrospect, some of the rap-like music sounds kind of fresh to me these days. Get Off's use of flute?--love it.

I think the ageism really kicked in in the 2000's for Prince. (And it wasn't helped by his religious conversion.) His live work kept him around but mostly as a talented relic for those who tuned into the superbowl to hear Purple Rain and impressive covers of Foo Fighters and Hendrix.

Yes, the albums Musicology and 3121 sold well (and AOA didn't sell to bad.) But there were no hit songs or radio play. Older artists don't get hit singles. And what else blows my mind is that Timberlake can put out an album that resembles 3121 in its electro-funk sound 8 months after Prince's album and Timberlake gets the hit singles. Adele can sing songs that sound like they were written and sung by a 50 year old soul singer, but because she is young and dare I say "White", she is a massive success.Young musicians steal older sounds or are considered derivative throwbacks but they can pull it off because they are young and people admire their knowledge of older styles. Someone from that era releasing music nearly identical will just be called a relic. One of the reasons I never took to Lenny Kravitz (despite his looks and skills) is that Are you going to go my way was so damn derivative. But that song was a big success at time. If a 6o's rocker, released the same song, no one would care.

PeteSilas said:

When i call it a "narrative" for Prince to be having a "tragic" decline, he is not nearly alone in how critics look at artists. Richard Pryor has a common narrative where he is completely written off after his burn incident and after he disavowed the n-word. It's a simple theory, after his tragic burning and his swearing off the n-word he is a different man. It's not really true but it's nice and neat. I can recall, although I was young, that Richard was never more popular, never more accepted than he was after his burn incident. Most of his movies got rave reviews for at least a few years and it wasn't until the late 80's where the talk of his artistic decline, culminating in his horribly reviewed but wonderful semi-autobiographical movie Jo Jo Dancer came out. His audience got tired of him, it's pretty simple. Then of course he really did get sick with MS and of course he couldn't function after that but that's a different story.

[Edited 2/11/17 23:13pm]

[Edited 2/11/17 23:15pm]

[Edited 2/11/17 23:20pm]

I feel you on dylan..

im still trying to figure out why he blew so many minds in the 60's.

DarkKnight1 said:

Its up to individuals, peers, spouses, etc... to either dig deeper into P's catalog or share it with others. I dont get why P's overall catalog doesnt receive more love, but I understand it. I have tried, for many years, to get into Dylan because he is so beloved....but it hasnt worked. Outside of Highway 61, I could take or leave virtually every other Dylan album ever made. One of my mini goals in life to experience as much music as possible to expand my horizons/knowledge of all of the most well respected artists....across many genres. I have been traveling through Rolling Stone's top 500 albums of all time list and to assist in this endeavor. It has been a tremendous experience and opened my eyes to many other brilliant artists that I wouldntve even given a shot back in the day.......except for Dylan, he is still wildly overrated.

Really only a few are okay? He has 100's of songs after the 80's. He is still the same dude (less dirty and more religious but still the same human being). YOu can't find more than a few songs in that massive catalog that are more than okay? I don't understand that. Prince didn't turn into Barry Manilow or post-70's Elton John. He could still write a melody and a good groove IMO.

We all are entitled to an opinion but I can't conceive of turning so sharply on a musican that hundreds of his songs are ignored with only a few written off as okay

I really can't wrap my head around it. I understand being disappointed with Prince, but I don't get that definite of a dismissal.

Ingela said:

People like what they like. Nothing wrong with that. I admit I like a few of his post 80's songs. Some of it is ok.

MD431Madcat said:

I feel you on dylan..

im still trying to figure out why he blew so many minds in the 60's.

DarkKnight1 said:

Its up to individuals, peers, spouses, etc... to either dig deeper into P's catalog or share it with others. I dont get why P's overall catalog doesnt receive more love, but I understand it. I have tried, for many years, to get into Dylan because he is so beloved....but it hasnt worked. Outside of Highway 61, I could take or leave virtually every other Dylan album ever made. One of my mini goals in life to experience as much music as possible to expand my horizons/knowledge of all of the most well respected artists....across many genres. I have been traveling through Rolling Stone's top 500 albums of all time list and to assist in this endeavor. It has been a tremendous experience and opened my eyes to many other brilliant artists that I wouldntve even given a shot back in the day.......except for Dylan, he is still wildly overrated.

His lyrics, tell you anything?

purplerabbithole said:

I know I am obsessed with this topic. IMO, Prince's genius wasn't a fluke or the result of the right collaborations.

Since i want to like everything he does, maybe I lack objectivity. I guess it is all subjective anyhow. {I am not saying I like all his songs; I am saying I am inclined to go into the listening experience expecting to hear something of merit.} But i guess my real question is "Do people judge P's music for its intrinsive value?" Is it possible to listen to each song as if it is the first song you have ever heard a from Prince?" I try to do it that way but am I correct in doing so?

In literary analysis college courses, we are taught about intrinsic value--which is reading a work of literature for its inherent value first. Only later after evaluating it on its own terms, were we encouraged to place the literary work in the context of its times or in juxtaposition against previous work.

Should P songs receive an 'intrinsic' grade and then a 'contextual' one?

[Edited 2/5/17 15:44pm]

[Edited 2/5/17 16:00pm]

I love nearly all of Prince's musical work in his latter days. I didn't like a lot of his lyrics in the 2000's. I felt he went over the top with his religion and fingure wagging. He could have became a Muslim or Scientologist and I'd have felt the same way. It did affect his work and how i viewed him. He might have felt he got found, I just thought he ended up a little lost. Lovesexy Prince was my kind of religion, accepting, no matter what. Kind of hoping the 'Purple Yoda' might have dumped it all and just gone with the Force in the end. Oh well!

I get that he was heavy with his words and i get his influence on many artists that i adore

ie: Jimi Hendrix..

but i've never been even mildly impressed..

Maybe you had to be there or something?

214 said:

MD431Madcat said:

I feel you on dylan..

im still trying to figure out why he blew so many minds in the 60's.

His lyrics, tell you anything?

problem seems to be it was never played nearly as much as his 80's output...so not many know of its greatness unless u were one of the followers around starting in the 80's

MD431Madcat said:

I get that he was heavy with his words and i get his influence on many artists that i adore

ie: Jimi Hendrix..

but i've never been even mildly impressed..

Maybe you had to be there or something?

214 said:

His lyrics, tell you anything?

I guess it may be something like: you get or you don't. I love his lyrics and voice, but to me his lyrics are everything.

purplerabbithole said:

Well obviously your opinin is set in stone. But it is just an opinion.

Shut the lights off? God, you are hyperbolic. Its hard to write songs with catchy melodies and he constantly did that. Whether you think his music was over-produced or had too much hip hop or too religious or chasing too many trends doesn't mean he "shut the lights off". Seriously, do you think the "Question of U" is a bad song but "Horny Toad" is somehow more profound and musically sophisticated because it happened to be made in the 80's. Van Jones once stated that Prince musically was like a water faucet..he couldn't stop doing it. So therefore, he did do junk sometimes and one could argue that he did junk in 80's also, he just probably had better editors.

I just dont' get it. When I lay my hands on U or Beautiful strange or Shhhh or Revelation or 1000 hugs and kisses are worse than Scarlet Pussy or the Arms of orion? We probably have very different tastes but he didn't run out of ideas and even writers who do buy the narrative that his work suffered after the WB years, wouldn't contend that he didn't have moments of brilliance in the last 30 years...not just okay shit, but brilliance. IT didn't sell but Prince was a controversial weird figure who couldn't promote or package his work properly for shit.

I never said anything about fans.

Ingela said:

purplerabbithole said:

Really only a few are okay? He has 100's of songs after the 80's. He is still the same dude (less dirty and more religious but still the same human being). YOu can't find more than a few songs in that massive catalog that are more than okay? I don't understand that. Prince didn't turn into Barry Manilow or post-70's Elton John. He could still write a melody and a good groove IMO.

We all are entitled to an opinion but I can't conceive of turning so sharply on a musican that hundreds of his songs are ignored with only a few written off as okay

I really can't wrap my head around it. I understand being disappointed with Prince, but I don't get that definite of a dismissal.

It's not about the fans. It's Princes music that took a sharp and dramatic leap off a cliff. I always found it confusing how such a great artist seemingly instantailously shut the lights off of his legendary talent. I alwYs felt it was drugs because that's the cliche we see every day when co-workers start behaving erratically and their work dramatically and suddenly suffers. So don't be confused with the listener, worry what happened to Prince. Thankfully he has a great resurgence and redeemed himself starting in the 2000's

Trickology said:

803 said:

I always liked his music, I think the naysayers are just trying to setup a dramatic narrative where the great artist tragically declines. It happened with Elvis, McCartney also got brutal reviews. I think what happens is people start taking a guy for granted Elvis did some shitty songs but he always did some good ones in their somewhere, right up until his death. Some of my favorite Elvis songs are the last ones but of course no one really cares about those or listens to those because he was "ruined" by the drugs and the colonel and hollywood and his own bad taste, bullshit! If people start losing interest and not paying attention anymore, the artist is only partly to blame for that. It's kind of of like falling in love, it's just a stage, the real relationship takes both parties to maintain and i assert that most fans are lazy listeners. Prince never fell off in my mind and he even got better in so many ways and he never got discouraged or dissuaded by his own so called fans bitching about his tragic decline. I can tell you, it's hard as hell to be creative when you face indifference, how do you go through the process when you know there is no reward? How did he do it? I don't know. Maybe because he just had to.

I was in high school and college during the sixties and Elvis didn't reflect our experiences. The music and culture changed drastically during those years and Elvis wasn't part of those experiences and couldn't interpret them. [Edited 2/5/17 18:21pm]

Cosign times 1000 (although i dont know many elvis songs from his last years)

The thing about Prince, he had endless well of sounds to draw from. I find it so tedious when people take the easy road & say "Prince's best work will always be Purple rain/SOTT/1999" blah blah And then they start riffing how "When doves cry is the greatest song he ever wrote" That's the cop out. Just admit to the fact "Look, there are so many, we have to go and experience it all as much as we can, there isn't one song, there isn't one album, there isn't one guitar solo...."

You want to know what I think prince's best work? My answer is:when he pressed the red button & rolled the tape, the tape never stopped flowing until the end of his life. Prince's best work is embodiment as a whole. Other than that, I have no effin clue how anyone can distinguish what his best work is, when we haven't even heard 70 percent of HIS remaining WORK. I think this is such a dumb question if someone has 1000's of pieces of music undiscovered. It's deceptive and it is kind of foolish when you think about it.

Even if we don't even hear any of those, when you revisit the other work I find the talk about "Prince's best band" I don't know what his best band is,tbh. Because Prince was always a solo entity even when it said "Revolution" or "NPG"

It's the same way I think people are full of shit who try to tell me who is the best band member. I can only tell you that Prince has such a phenomenonal ear for musicians, I can't point to anyone and say "Oh that guitarist was" I just think he was meant to play with who he was destined to play with.

The plethora of obsessions with musicians like Eric Leeds, Prince's NPG horn sections SCARED Leeds. He told you his thoughts on Horn heads in recent interviews, one of the greatest horn sections in recorded history. Just amazing shit and Prince with expanded horn section is a godsend we got to hear that. Atlanta Bliss/Leeds aren't somehow superior to NPG Horns. Equal levels of musicianship & performance energy.

I think all the incarnations of NPG will go toe to toe with any of the Revolution. Soooo many fans HATE to hear that, but I think Wendy & Lisa are full of it, NPG was as great as anything they did.

I don't think their evaluation of NPG holds any water.

One thing that makes me different than a lot of people, I don't have music nostalgia, i love what i love regardless of a year. I don't have any ERA for music, music is ever constant, there is no "golden years" for it. There's just too much to evaluate to make a blanket statement like that. Come back to me orgers, when you listen to every piece from A-Z that holds some kind of high standard to a particular audience. It isn't going to happen, therefore you or I don't know what the best fucking era for music is. We have no clue & it is okay to say that.

Now, there are Prince songs I skip because I just don't want to hear them ever again, but they are so far and few between.

I think Emancipation is as great & innovative as Purple Rain/SOTT/Lovesexy/1999/Dirty Mind. The greatest Prince works you can't pin down any album or era. These musicians who say this who worked with Prince, they likely were burnt out on being around him for hundreds & hundreds of hours. They don't know, we don't know & Prince didn't know. It was just too much to evaluate.

It's impossible, that's why he is

I really hope all the reviews & album acclaims go up in flames in the next few centuries. I think people will arguably enjoy mostly everything he did as an artist. I doubt without any critic interference, centuries from now, people will be acclaiming one meager album from the eighties. They will be in awe endlessly of his work & it will vary from country to country .

If someone was to ask me about my thoughts on Purple Rain, I think I would say this "his highest selling album, but clearly as time showed us, he had so much more in store for his listeners of innovation,pioneering & experimenting & amazing songwriting & musicianship"

I just don't know how anyone can honestly say with a straight face "I will tell you his best work" It's just so so so so much to assess. It is similar when people mention Miles "Oh, I love kind of Blue" Has that person listened to the majority of his work? How can you say it is his best if all you listened to were 2 fucking albums? How, Sway? (as the legendary Kanye said)

That's our NUMERO UNO problem. People who are saying "Prince's best work is", most of these people haven't listened to a goddamn prince album in it's entirety. That's hard cold facts for people who quote & reference a lot of the public's reaction.

Outside the Prince bubble, i doubt the majority who say the following "Prince would never top Purple Rain musically", havent listened or committed their time to his work. It is all bullshit & will always be bullshit.

Get back to me in 1000 years when these jokers have listened to everything in the vault more than once or twice. IT.AINT.GONNA.HAPPEN.

HEY yOu!

On Questlove's Pandora show with the Revolution, Wendy even said that Prince's later bands could play circles around her

purplerabbithole said:

ThePanther said:

Ingela said:

Its cool you feel so passionate about his lesser work, but sadly, the reality is it's mostly only you and a couple of other people. Like I said, there are songs in the 90's. That are great. But the decade as whole saw an artist that dumbed down his music, chased tacky trends, and became an caricature of his old self. Was it because of...personal problems? Perhaps drugs? A medical condition? Judt not that into it any more? My guess is it was all of the above. We know he was having issues with his record company and probably spending too much of his time fighting them instead of focusing on his music. Probably trying to appease them and his lack of sales with music he felt was more commercial and probably self medicating himself to cope with the stress. He sure looked like shit most of the time at the time, and his new music sounded like it too. For whatever reason his 90's suffered a sudden steep and extremely dramatic fall. [Edited 2/16/17 10:30am]

Ah--you can go on and believe all of this and listen to all of the other excellent music of your choice.

Germanegro said:

Ingela said:

Germanegro said:

Ah--you can go on and believe all of this and listen to all of the other excellent music of your choice.

Of course! And I recommend the same to you. There's a lot of great music out there new and old. If you haven't tried a streaming music service yet, I suggest you do. There's a wide spectrum of music out there! Explore and enjoy!

Certainly. 90's Prince music is cool with me. The streaming bug hasn't hit me just yet; I'm not sure that it will--maybe I'll do Tidal to collect some of Prince's rarer stuff in an easy grab. I already have plenty of exposure to new and differerent stuff without paying that kind 'o rent! Streaming music is a nice option for those with low budgets to have, I'll agree, however. I'm just stronger on supporting the musicians I like vs paying delivery services. I also enjoy looking for new stuff out there on my own vs being sheparded to choice gems from another purveyor--my own quirky ways.

Germanegro said:

Remember when discussing the 90s era, that was a pivotal point in the music industry. Fans started looking for artists that they could relate to more closely. Artists that came from the same background, etc as them. Also the music industry started paying less attention to the mega stars and also did not wan to spend as much promoting them. You start seeing the industry follow the "one-hit wonder" syndrome as it was more profitable for them to promote one single and then drop the artist than work with an established artist with demands. With Prince in the 90's era of course he was having major issues with the label and not getting as much radio airplay as a result of all of the above. His music was still good during this era but I think it kind of got lost with every thing that was going on.

i know I do! Everything after 2007 sucks!