independent and unofficial
Prince fan community
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Prince: Music and More > In the end was building Paisley Park a good idea?
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 2 of 3 <123>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #30 posted 06/23/18 3:23pm

disch

The first 2 you list were just residences, akin to what many fabulously wealthy and perhaps slightly eccentric performers might have. Paisley park was primarily (and for most of its life, exclusively) a commercial recording and film production facility. I’m not seeing a ton of parallels here, other than the owners of these spaces are dead.
-
(And I’ve been to Graceland and pp. they didn’t strike me as hugely similar in concept.)

-

Mintchip said:

Who can say? Having never been there, I'm particularly uninformed. But since this is the internet, I won't let that stop me: I can think of three rock star compounds off the top of my head: Graceland, The Neverland Ranch, and Paisley Park. Putting aside (although maybe we shouldn't) that all three stars died the same way, all three also became more remote, eccentric, and bizarre as time went on. I happen to love Michael, Prince, and Elvis, but not for the records they made during their isolated fortress years.


.


So, NO, I vote that it was NOT a good idea.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #31 posted 06/23/18 3:49pm

rdhull

avatar

PeteSilas said:

rdhull said:

He was creative before PP.

It can be argued that the music before PP had more fire to it.

i guess it could. However, I think his Paisley Park idea was to create his own Motown but he actually didn't like competition (the time) so it would never work that way although maybe it could have if he'd been more open, not just to competition but also to newer forms like hip hop, that's the only ways i could see it working. the minneapolis sound like most sounds don't last very long, it was heard on radio for maybe what? five years? that's a long time for a sound to influence, play etc.., in the pop world. A smart business man would have known that and been ready with fresh new shit.

I agree. But Im also thinking that having something like PP at your immediate disposal (or some other word) influenced his music/crative process. Prior to PP, he was in makeshift home studios, mobile units, having Susan Rogers etc to come up with unorthodox ways of recording that ..lets fce it..created his best work.

The whole RUNNING of PP was terrible. Thats just my opinion. Signing one off talent, having most artists and repetoire as an extension of him and his sound, etc. Thats a different disappointing story. Dale Bozzio? He tried.

"Climb in my fur."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #32 posted 06/23/18 3:49pm

PeteSilas

disch said:

The first 2 you list were just residences, akin to what many fabulously wealthy and perhaps slightly eccentric performers might have. Paisley park was primarily (and for most of its life, exclusively) a commercial recording and film production facility. I’m not seeing a ton of parallels here, other than the owners of these spaces are dead. - (And I’ve been to Graceland and pp. they didn’t strike me as hugely similar in concept.) - Mintchip said:

Who can say? Having never been there, I'm particularly uninformed. But since this is the internet, I won't let that stop me: I can think of three rock star compounds off the top of my head: Graceland, The Neverland Ranch, and Paisley Park. Putting aside (although maybe we shouldn't) that all three stars died the same way, all three also became more remote, eccentric, and bizarre as time went on. I happen to love Michael, Prince, and Elvis, but not for the records they made during their isolated fortress years.

.

So, NO, I vote that it was NOT a good idea.

they aren't, Prince was no doubt more productive than the other two so it makes sense that the remnants of his life are more associated with hard work than leisure. Elvis had a studio in his house but I'm not sure how much great music was done there. But the point that a complex like that would turn into a stone around the man's neck was inevitable pretty much. It was too much. Just like the mansions of mj and elvis were too much, you only need so much for practical needs, after that it's wasteful or ostentatious. So, he toured, must have had mixed feelings about it though I'm sure he loved it all. He was the only act that generated real money there so multiple studios, multiple offices and rooms were something that he could have done without. Who knows what or why he wanted something that big but if wasn't actually trying to be a barry gordy he shouldn't have done it. at least on that scale.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #33 posted 06/23/18 3:55pm

rdhull

avatar

voph said:

PeteSilas said:

i guess it could. However, I think his Paisley Park idea was to create his own Motown but he actually didn't like competition (the time) so it would never work that way although maybe it could have if he'd been more open, not just to competition but also to newer forms like hip hop, that's the only ways i could see it working. the minneapolis sound like most sounds don't last very long, it was heard on radio for maybe what? five years? that's a long time for a sound to influence, play etc.., in the pop world. A smart business man would have known that and been ready with fresh new shit.

[troll banned snip - luv4u].

LOL no he wasn't. His mystique includes the lack of being a savy business man after PR . MJ snuck in and purchased that Beatles etc catalogue. In the mid 80's. For 25 mil. The licensing alone was worth billions. Oh, and he gave Little Richard his masters etc..fo free. By 88, Prince tours were losing money (Lovesexy). I love prince probably more than anyone here but lets be in reality here.

"Climb in my fur."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #34 posted 06/23/18 6:53pm

voph

Mintchip said:

Who can say? Having never been there, I'm particularly uninformed. But since this is the internet, I won't let that stop me: I can think of three rock star compounds off the top of my head: Graceland, The Neverland Ranch, and Paisley Park. Putting aside (although maybe we shouldn't) that all three stars died the same way, all three also became more remote, eccentric, and bizarre as time went on. I happen to love Michael, Prince, and Elvis, but not for the records they made during their isolated fortress years.


.


So, NO, I vote that it was NOT a good idea.

[troll banned snip - luv4u]
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #35 posted 06/23/18 7:04pm

rdhull

avatar

To be fair, Neverland and Graceland werent really recording industrial studios like PP was. They were homes.

"Climb in my fur."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #36 posted 06/23/18 7:06pm

SoulAlive

rdhull said:

Prince was a smarter business man.

LOL no he wasn't. His mystique includes the lack of being a savy business man after PR . MJ snuck in and purchased that Beatles etc catalogue. In the mid 80's. For 25 mil. The licensing alone was worth billions. Oh, and he gave Little Richard his masters etc..fo free. By 88, Prince tours were losing money (Lovesexy). I love prince probably more than anyone here but lets be in reality here.

lol,yeah it's kinda silly to say that Prince was a smart business man.There were at least two times in his career when he was having cash flow problems.The first was in 1988 during the 'Lovesexy' era (some of the US shows didn't sell out).The second time was in 1994.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #37 posted 06/23/18 7:11pm

rdhull

avatar

SoulAlive said:

rdhull said:

LOL no he wasn't. His mystique includes the lack of being a savy business man after PR . MJ snuck in and purchased that Beatles etc catalogue. In the mid 80's. For 25 mil. The licensing alone was worth billions. Oh, and he gave Little Richard his masters etc..fo free. By 88, Prince tours were losing money (Lovesexy). I love prince probably more than anyone here but lets be in reality here.

lol,yeah it's kinda silly to say that Prince was a smart business man.There were at least two times in his career when he was having cash flow problems.The first was in 1988 during the 'Lovesexy' era (some of the US shows didn't sell out).The second time was in 1994.

Not tomention all the poor decision making with the music etc regarding listening to the people who are saavy about those thing like managers, accountnts, record company execs etc. Yes, in 1978-1985 he was maverick but some things he decided upon himself after that period aginst better judgment just didnt work as well as he was used to.

"Climb in my fur."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #38 posted 06/24/18 5:56am

littlemissG

avatar

My take on it is like everything it’s double edge sword.
It gave him his own kingdom to rule over, but may have fed into some bad decision most obiviously the 100 million dollar deal with WB. As a shelter from some of the unwanted spotlight, it worked. As a Superstar factory, it didn’t. If he built pp in phases, expand as needed e would had a lot less stress in his life. Doubled it’s the fact he didn’t use it as his primary residence for many years. I always though if it was going to be his home, his living quarters would not be as easy to access.
No More Haters on the Internet.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #39 posted 06/24/18 7:08am

funksterr

I think it was a bad idea. I don't see where it was beneficial to his creativity in any way.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #40 posted 06/24/18 7:27am

rogifan

disch said:

The first 2 you list were just residences, akin to what many fabulously wealthy and perhaps slightly eccentric performers might have. Paisley park was primarily (and for most of its life, exclusively) a commercial recording and film production facility. I’m not seeing a ton of parallels here, other than the owners of these spaces are dead.
-
(And I’ve been to Graceland and pp. they didn’t strike me as hugely similar in concept.)

[/quote]
Was PP really that post 90s? How many artists that weren’t Prince protégés were recording music or videos there in the 00s? I do agree though you can’t really compare PP to Graceland.
Paisley Park is in your heart
#PrinceForever 💜
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #41 posted 06/24/18 7:30am

rogifan

databank said:

Not sure what Prince had in mind exactly but let's not forget that in the mid 80's to mid 90's Prince became a mini-entertainment industry all by himself: there was Prince himself, the recordings, the tours, the movies, the music videos, then there was Paisley Park the label; Paisley Park the recording/mixing studio, filming complex, rehearsal space and concert venue; Paisley Park the songwriters/producers' pool; the Glam Slam clubs; the NPG Stores and catalogue retail; the attempts at publishing magazines; the Prince comics and all the nonsense from clothes to candles and perfumes and finally even the Love4OneAnother charity...


.


Prince probably lost contact with reality at some point, believing he could be an entertainment brand all by himself, but Paisley Park Studios were part of this dream: before he closed it to outside acts in 1994, lots of people would record, mix, play, rehearse and shoot there: it briefly was a profitable, reputable place for creative people to work and meet, even if some reports suggest that WB forced certain artists on the studio to recoup their investment, and that Prince would rather not have the likes of REM working there.


.


Of course, it later seemed like a somewhat eerie, abandonned place when Prince turned it into his private castle after 94. But in the end he managed to keep it until the end, didn't he? So why shouldn't he have a recording complex when other stars have other fancy things such as dozens of race cars, castles in England and shit like this?


This. All of it.
Paisley Park is in your heart
#PrinceForever 💜
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #42 posted 06/24/18 8:38am

littlemissG

avatar

I also wonder if Paisley being so private also contributed to him making albums for his latest bedmate for decades rather than of going out and finding really aspiring artist as he did when the later on.

The main downside of Paisley is it was designed to be a one genius dynasty for his creations.
In a revisionist history Prince could have offer Jimmy Jam And Terry Lewis positions under the PP label as artist developers and producers once he realized that was where their interest laid, instead of firing them.
No More Haters on the Internet.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #43 posted 06/24/18 8:46am

disch

You’re right that it wasn’t commercial past mid-90s in the sense that there weren’t really clients besides prince associates. But it was still a professional faciry(rather than residence) and only after the mid-2000s did prince live there (which was one of the odder things he did in his last years)
-

rogifan said:

disch said:

The first 2 you list were just residences, akin to what many fabulously wealthy and perhaps slightly eccentric performers might have. Paisley park was primarily (and for most of its life, exclusively) a commercial recording and film production facility. I’m not seeing a ton of parallels here, other than the owners of these spaces are dead.
-
(And I’ve been to Graceland and pp. they didn’t strike me as hugely similar in concept.)


Was PP really that post 90s? How many artists that weren’t Prince protégés were recording music or videos there in the 00s? I do agree though you can’t really compare PP to Graceland.[/quote]
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #44 posted 06/24/18 9:14am

RodeoSchro

I think it was a genius idea. Prince had lean times now and then, but not after 2004. “Musicology” fattened his bank account such that funding PP on its own was no problem. Now, funding OTHER things may have motivated him to tour more. His lifestyle was very expensive. Gulfstream and Falcon jets aren’t cheap to fly.

But Prince loved to perform. I have no doubt he’d have toured just as much if the Park had never been built. Nor do I think he’d have created “better” music sans Park.

For any musician Paisley Park would have been heaven on Earth.


.
[Edited 6/24/18 9:16am]
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #45 posted 06/24/18 10:01am

ufoclub

avatar

Paisley Park could have been a different influence on its own creator, if he had kept management hired to keep it running as an available studio for non-prince projects, like it was originally intended. When did he close the doors to outsiders?

If he had prioritized or divided part of it to be it’s own alternative Sunset Studios, and invested more money and incentives to promote it to get artists to come in and work on their own stuff, instead of eventually closing it off for only his own use... then it might have been something that was constantly evolving with a cash flow to support repairs and modifications.

TV could have even filmed there. Blockbuster movies these days are constantly going where they find tax incentives and refurbushing industrial buildings to shoot the contemporary style of green screen fantasy. If Paisley had developed this kind of soundstage and worked with the state to go for tax incentives, it would have been a hub for some of these huge movies.

It would have been this active place that was somewhat out of his complete control or sense of comfort, and for that, obviously, he was wealthy enough to have bought an entire mansion and refitted it to be his own private studio.

Who knows what concepts, styles, albums or tours would have developed in some alternative reality? It’s similar to imagining if he had stayed with Warners throughout.

At the same time... what more can you ask for? Prince was quite accomplished and had proven himself time and time again in different ways.

I do feel, based on his fandom of cinema, he was probably a bit disappointed that his successful movie career never rose above Purple Rain.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #46 posted 06/24/18 11:26am

databank

avatar

littlemissG said:

I also wonder if Paisley being so private also contributed to him making albums for his latest bedmate for decades rather than of going out and finding really aspiring artist as he did when the later on. The main downside of Paisley is it was designed to be a one genius dynasty for his creations. In a revisionist history Prince could have offer Jimmy Jam And Terry Lewis positions under the PP label as artist developers and producers once he realized that was where their interest laid, instead of firing them.

To be honest, I don't think Prince ever cared for anyone that was really aspiring, as long as the people would work long hours when he'd tell them to and release the records he made them to release for whatever paycheck he'd give them.

It so happened that The Time was a band comprised of extremely talented individual, and Prince wouldn't have had it any other way because he needed people whose musical skills would reflect his, but all those side-projects were never anything but vehicules for his creativity.

.

Were Vanity, Susan, Jill, Susannah, Robin, Carmen or Mayte anything but bedmates? Was Brenda or Apollonia memorable singers? No, they were all talented to some extent (Jill certainly was, and is, a greatly skilled vocalist but she ain't much of a songwriter), but they mostly just happened to be there and to be able to fulfill a role in the Prince mythos. The most talented of them all maybe was Ingrid, who unfortunately didn't choose to pursue the career she could have had as a remarkable underground spoken word artist. And it is worth noting that Ingrid had enough personality that Prince eventually stepped off the project and left Michael and Levi finish it. Same with Taja: extremely talented singer and songwriter, so Prince gives her 2 songs and stays away from her record, leaving it to her to do what she wanted to then leave her in the hands of WB for her second album. And look at what happened with Rosie: came in in 89, was promised an album and 5 years later the label would collapse with her record having been postponed year after year... Sheila, of course, had talent and a career of her own before meeting him, but was she much more than turned into a female version of Prince during her tenure at PP? And what happened when she decided she wanted to do things her way? She was thanked and left to Wb as well. Isn't it a pity that a great record like Sex Cymbal wouldn't be on PP? Same with Jill BTW, she didn't last long when she started to disagree with being a sex doll for her second record. Prince would stay away from any artist that had their own will and ambitions.

Of course there was Mavis, but being a legacy act already by then she was, alongside George Clinton and, later on, Chaka and Larry, Prince paying back his dues by trying to help his childhood's heroes with their careers. As for other Paisley Park artists, Prince would usually stay away from them, and didn't seem to care much whether they'd go anywhere or they'd just be an alibi to be like "hey, I got my own vanity label".

.

Prince never fostered talent: whether you're talking The Time, the 6's, The Family, Jill, Madhouse, Eric, Carmen, the NPG, Mayte, Tamar, Bria... even Sheila! All those people were playing a part in his movie, playing characters for him and allowing him to release more music than he could under his own name while building his mythos about MPLS being... a place that fostered talent! It's remarkable that he almost gave-up on the side-projects entirely once free from WB. Why bother, when he could release anything he wanted at any given time?

.

It's actually at the very end of his career that he began to act as a real producer, by taking it legit songwriters such as Andy or Judith and helping them out with their own musical projects, or allowing and even encouraging his bandmembers, such as Rhonda, Ida or Liv to pursue their own musical career on the side (something he'd never have allowed in the early days).

.

Paisley Park was a lively place for its first 6 years or so, because Prince had to allow the artists that were signed on his label, and his pool of producers (Levi, David, Ricky, Michael...) to record there, and because he had to rent it out for profit or allow WB to use it for other WB artists because WB had paid for the place. But Prince never cared for fostering talent: all he cared for was maintaining the illusion that he was fostering talent. But they were really all just actors playing in his movie nod

[Edited 6/24/18 11:30am]

A COMPREHENSIVE PRINCE DISCOGRAPHY (work in progress ^^): https://sites.google.com/...scography/
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #47 posted 06/24/18 1:13pm

000000

Paisley Park had to be built because Prince was kinda a control freak (narcissistic). He wanted to do everything. Just saying.

http://www.businessinsider.com/signs-you-are-a-narcissist-2015-10

lol

[Edited 6/24/18 13:20pm]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #48 posted 06/24/18 1:23pm

42Kristen

Yes it was good idea. Prince earned what got making the movie: Purple Rain. The album and touring for the Purple Rain; where he had that mishap and injured himself on stage. Yeah,I think it is worth it.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #49 posted 06/24/18 2:13pm

000000

42Kristen said:

Yes it was good idea. Prince earned what got making the movie: Purple Rain. The album and touring for the Purple Rain; where he had that mishap and injured himself on stage. Yeah,I think it is worth it.

good idea. I agree cool

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #50 posted 06/24/18 2:15pm

OldFriends4Sal
e

I think if Prince still had his power team of people: the Revolution, the Time, Sheila E(1984-1986band) Jill, Vanity 6, the Family, Mazarati etc I think the energy of Paisley Park would have been different and more successful.

Also I think he lost something, when his recordings exclusively took place and PP and no longer at the Warehouse, Sunset Sound, home or other place around the country.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #51 posted 06/24/18 3:37pm

SoulAlive

littlemissG said:

I also wonder if Paisley being so private also contributed to him making albums for his latest bedmates for decades rather than of going out and finding really aspiring artist as he did when the later on. The main downside of Paisley is it was designed to be a one genius dynasty for his creations. In a revisionist history Prince could have offered Jimmy Jam And Terry Lewis positions under the PP label as artist developers and producers once he realized that was where their interest laid, instead of firing them.

I totally agree.The Paisley Park label could have been so much bigger and more successful if Prince had done things differently,such as utilizing the amazing talent that he had around him.Instead,the label became Prince's vanity label and wasn't taken seriously.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #52 posted 06/24/18 9:00pm

kewlschool

avatar

littlemissG said:

I also wonder if Paisley being so private also contributed to him making albums for his latest bedmate for decades rather than of going out and finding really aspiring artist as he did when the later on. The main downside of Paisley is it was designed to be a one genius dynasty for his creations. In a revisionist history Prince could have offer Jimmy Jam And Terry Lewis positions under the PP label as artist developers and producers once he realized that was where their interest laid, instead of firing them.

Prince fired Jam and Lewis early 80's. Late 80's Jam and Lewis where their own bosses. No way, would they work for Prince, other then a project to project approach. Prince would have made them promote Carmen Electra and other artists of that level, then blame them for the lack of sales!

99.9% of everything I say is strictly for my own entertainment
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #53 posted 06/24/18 9:26pm

SoulAlive

kewlschool said:

littlemissG said:

I also wonder if Paisley being so private also contributed to him making albums for his latest bedmate for decades rather than of going out and finding really aspiring artist as he did when the later on. The main downside of Paisley is it was designed to be a one genius dynasty for his creations. In a revisionist history Prince could have offer Jimmy Jam And Terry Lewis positions under the PP label as artist developers and producers once he realized that was where their interest laid, instead of firing them.

Prince fired Jam and Lewis early 80's. Late 80's Jam and Lewis where their own bosses. No way, would they work for Prince, other then a project to project approach. Prince would have made them promote Carmen Electra and other artists of that level, then blame them for the lack of sales!

Jam and Lewis liked being a part of the Prince camp.The problem was,they also wanted to produce other artists and bands,which Prince was against.I'm sure there could have been a compromise.Can you imagine all the potential hit songs that they could have given to Paisley Park artists? For example,imagine The Family getting their hands on "Human" (a major hit that J&L produced for the Human League)....or imagine Jill Jones getting a surefire hit single like "I Didn't Mean To Turn You On" (a major hit that J&L gave to Cherrelle) hmmm Let's be honest...the reason why most of the PP artists failed is because their albums simply lacked hits.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #54 posted 06/24/18 9:46pm

databank

avatar

SoulAlive said:

Let's be honest... no no no!

Thank you wink

.

[Edited 6/24/18 21:48pm]

A COMPREHENSIVE PRINCE DISCOGRAPHY (work in progress ^^): https://sites.google.com/...scography/
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #55 posted 06/25/18 5:22am

OldFriends4Sal
e

SoulAlive said:

kewlschool said:

Prince fired Jam and Lewis early 80's. Late 80's Jam and Lewis where their own bosses. No way, would they work for Prince, other then a project to project approach. Prince would have made them promote Carmen Electra and other artists of that level, then blame them for the lack of sales!

Jam and Lewis liked being a part of the Prince camp.The problem was,they also wanted to produce other artists and bands,which Prince was against.I'm sure there could have been a compromise.Can you imagine all the potential hit songs that they could have given to Paisley Park artists? For example,imagine The Family getting their hands on "Human" (a major hit that J&L produced for the Human League)....or imagine Jill Jones getting a surefire hit single like "I Didn't Mean To Turn You On" (a major hit that J&L gave to Cherrelle) hmmm Let's be honest...the reason why most of the PP artists failed is because their albums simply lacked hits.

You mean the post 86 PP artists?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #56 posted 06/25/18 10:31am

RJOrion

Prince not letting Jimmy Jam & Terry Lewis have creative freedom and then firing them is/was EASILY the worst business and music decision Prince ever made...all those hits Jimmy&Terry produced throughtout the 80s, 90s and even 2000s...janet jackson, new edition, sos band, sounds of blackness, human league, ralph tresvant, michael jackson, etc etc etc....all those iconic songs by those artists listed could have possibly belonged to P or his proteges...unimaginable what great music they could have produced together
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #57 posted 06/25/18 1:26pm

SoulAlive

RJOrion said:

Prince not letting Jimmy Jam & Terry Lewis have creative freedom and then firing them is/was EASILY the worst business and music decision Prince ever made...all those hits Jimmy&Terry produced throughtout the 80s, 90s and even 2000s...janet jackson, new edition, sos band, sounds of blackness, human league, ralph tresvant, michael jackson, etc etc etc....all those iconic songs by those artists listed could have possibly belonged to P or his proteges...unimaginable what great music they could have produced together

Exactly!

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #58 posted 06/25/18 1:58pm

SkipperLove

My take on it is not quite that harsh. I think the place changed according to the way Prince changed and then changed back again..IMO, it wasn't just a straight forward decent into narcissism. IF he was being generous, the place was generous. If he was being self-serving, the place was self-serving to his interests. If he was using it as extension of himself, than that is what it was. If he was being paranoid, then the place was run in a paranoid fashion. If he was opening up to the local population a little, then the place was opened to the locals. The recordings he did with some of his later associates (Judith HIll, Chaka Khan, Mono Neon, Andy Allo) were respectable attempts at colloboration and/or mentorship. If the place was being used as a way to isolate himself, unfortunately, that is what it became. It was a bubble, sure. But for a man with a degree of social anxiety, I understand why it became what he felt he needed to live and work and express himself. ONly people who see no good music after it was built think it didn't warrant some good things. Remember the first performance of the Piano and Microphone tour was there. Remember rehearsals for concerts were there. A lot of good music came out of that place. Unfortunately, it was a crutch and contributed to his death by allowing him to live in delusion at times. I think he would have probably been better off without Paisley Park on a personal level but I can't ignore the good things that came out of that place. Did you guys see this house in Bel-Air that was just put on the market? . He lived there in 2011 (presumably renting) and presumably threw parties and performed in the basement where the swimming pool was. He didn't live in Paisley constantly. I believe he did record in other places and hang out in other places.. PP was a mixed bag, a place where halls contained large pictures of himself and collaborators but also the place where the most humble room in the facility was the one in which he slept in.

photo

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #59 posted 06/25/18 2:05pm

SkipperLove

Hindsight is 20/20. Who knows if that would have happened? Maybe they really really wanted to prove themselves after he fired them. I imagine JJ and TL are pretty competitive themselves. Weren't they a part of Minneapolis's battle of bands back in the day. IF they had stayed, maybe they would have been less competitive and maybe Prince would not have challenged himself to keep striving where his own music was concerned if they hadn't accomplished all they did without his involvement. Also, JJ and TL worked with many folks in the overall music industry. They were players in LA, and folks like MJ and Janet Jackson were already famous. Prince's artists were either virtually unknown or past their prime. His operation was small in comparison. I think they knew staying with PRine would stiffle them--thus the deals they attempting on their own while still under his umbrella. I imagine he thought they would place their outside endeavors over working for him eventually.

SoulAlive said:

RJOrion said:

Prince not letting Jimmy Jam & Terry Lewis have creative freedom and then firing them is/was EASILY the worst business and music decision Prince ever made...all those hits Jimmy&Terry produced throughtout the 80s, 90s and even 2000s...janet jackson, new edition, sos band, sounds of blackness, human league, ralph tresvant, michael jackson, etc etc etc....all those iconic songs by those artists listed could have possibly belonged to P or his proteges...unimaginable what great music they could have produced together

Exactly!

[Edited 6/25/18 14:10pm]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 2 of 3 <123>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Prince: Music and More > In the end was building Paisley Park a good idea?