jaawwnn said:

babynoz said:

Again, good points Purplerabbithole.

LOL @ jaawwnn trying to use one left-handed compliment for cover.

Fair enough, if you're finding insults within compliments then there's no conversation to be had here, you just see what you want to see.

As for people talking about "objectivity", don't make me laugh. All we have and all we'll ever have is subjectivity. Alan didn't like Prince's SNL performance, ok that's allowed. I liked it myself but I also thought he raised some good points in his criticism of it. I don't feel the need to assasinate his entire character because I disagree with him over something.

People assasinate Prince's character all the time because they disagree with him too.People have cut Prince up with name calling because they did not like his new records. I have seen this with my own two eyes. I don't see anyone running to defend him but are quick to defend Alan and others. If Prince had to take the criticism so can Alan and others. I don't like double standards.

wonder505 said:

Thanks purplerabbithole. Great points.

Notice that after repeatedly asking for a specific, detailed criticism of Leed's comments, they get exactly that and now they keep tap dancing and never address any of the points that purplerabbithole made?

Purplestar88 said:

jaawwnn said:

Fair enough, if you're finding insults within compliments then there's no conversation to be had here, you just see what you want to see.

As for people talking about "objectivity", don't make me laugh. All we have and all we'll ever have is subjectivity. Alan didn't like Prince's SNL performance, ok that's allowed. I liked it myself but I also thought he raised some good points in his criticism of it. I don't feel the need to assasinate his entire character because I disagree with him over something.

People assasinate Prince's character all the time because they disagree with him too.People have cut Prince up with name calling because they did not like his new records. I have seen this with my own two eyes. I don't see anyone running to defend him but are quick to defend Alan and others. If Prince had to take the criticism so can Alan and others. I don't like double standards.

You sound like a child playing some tit for tat game.

Nobody in this thread has assasinated Prince's character. Alan, in the words he posted about SNL, didn't assasinate Prince's character.

The only people who've insulted Prince are the ones putting words in Alans mouth.

Purplestar88 said:

jaawwnn said:

Fair enough, if you're finding insults within compliments then there's no conversation to be had here, you just see what you want to see.

As for people talking about "objectivity", don't make me laugh. All we have and all we'll ever have is subjectivity. Alan didn't like Prince's SNL performance, ok that's allowed. I liked it myself but I also thought he raised some good points in his criticism of it. I don't feel the need to assasinate his entire character because I disagree with him over something.

People assasinate Prince's character all the time because they disagree with him too.People have cut Prince up with name calling because they did not like his new records. I have seen this with my own two eyes. I don't see anyone running to defend him but are quick to defend Alan and others. If Prince had to take the criticism so can Alan and others. I don't like double standards.

Prince was dogged on here like a leper, often just as a result of some entitled assclown having a tantrum about not getting some remasters or other such pettiness.

As I've said before an will continue to say, he took more abuse around here than all of his associates combined so ALL of them and every one of their apologists can cry me a river.

Noodled24 said:

Purplestar88 said:

I believe I did criticize his statements. I see nothing wrong with people can discrediting Alan as a source of information because of what he said about SNL. Fair is Fair. People discredit Prince all the time and I don't people running to defend him. I could care less about Bart. He has nothing to do with the discussion.

He worked with James Brown, Prince & D'angelo... unless your resume is as impressive I suspect biographers and film makers will continue to reach out to the Leeds brothers before "PurpleStar88".

I know who he has work for. So what? What does that have to do with anything. Prince has an impressive resume too and people dog him. The biographers can come to him and people can and will decided how they feel about his statements and actions.

Purplestar88 said:

Noodled24 said:

He worked with James Brown, Prince & D'angelo... unless your resume is as impressive I suspect biographers and film makers will continue to reach out to the Leeds brothers before "PurpleStar88".

I know who he has work for. So what?

... I can't tell if you're being childish or stupid? We've been over this for the past 2 pages.

What does that have to do with anything. Prince has an impressive resume too and people dog him. The biographers can come to him and people can and will decided how they feel about his statements and actions.

Again. Nobody in this thread has dogged Prince. Except where people have put words in Alan's mouth so they could dog Prince.

Noodled24 said:

Purplestar88 said:

People assasinate Prince's character all the time because they disagree with him too.People have cut Prince up with name calling because they did not like his new records. I have seen this with my own two eyes. I don't see anyone running to defend him but are quick to defend Alan and others. If Prince had to take the criticism so can Alan and others. I don't like double standards.

You sound like a child playing some tit for tat game.

Nobody in this thread has assasinated Prince's character. Alan, in the words he posted about SNL, didn't assasinate Prince's character.

The only people who've insulted Prince are the ones putting words in Alans mouth.

I am saying people in the past and presant has assasinated Prince's character in posts I seen. I am not taking about this thread.

babynoz said:

Purplestar88 said:

People assasinate Prince's character all the time because they disagree with him too.People have cut Prince up with name calling because they did not like his new records. I have seen this with my own two eyes. I don't see anyone running to defend him but are quick to defend Alan and others. If Prince had to take the criticism so can Alan and others. I don't like double standards.

Prince was dogged on here like a leper, often just as a result of some entitled assclown having a tantrum about not getting some remasters or other such pettiness.

As I've said before an will continue to say, he took more abuse around here than all of his associates combined so ALL of them and every one of their apologists can cry me a river.

It's the stone cold truth.

Purplestar88 said:

I am saying people in the past and presant has assasinated Prince's character in posts I seen. I am not taking about this thread.

Why is that relevant?

Noodled24 said:

Purplestar88 said:

... I can't tell if you're being childish or stupid? We've been over this for the past 2 pages.

What does that have to do with anything. Prince has an impressive resume too and people dog him. The biographers can come to him and people can and will decided how they feel about his statements and actions.

Again. Nobody in this thread has dogged Prince. Except where people have put words in Alan's mouth so they could dog Prince.

Listen I am done with you. I did not call you any names. I did not say any one on this thread doged Prince. I did not put words in any one mouths. I have my opinion and I am not backing down just like Alan or you. No one is above criticism or to have their credibility questioned. I stand my statements.

Purplestar88 said:

Listen I am done with you. I did not call you any names. I did not say any one on this thread doged Prince. I did not put words in any one mouths. I have my opinion and I am not backing down just like Alan or you. No one is above criticism or to have their credibility questioned. I stand my statements.

Why bring it up then?

You're entitled to your opinion obviously... even if your opinion is ill-informed and deliberately misinterpreting something someone else said. However, being entitled to an opinion doesn't necessarily mean you should post it publicly.

babynoz said:

jaawwnn said:

Fair enough, if you're finding insults within compliments then there's no conversation to be had here, you just see what you want to see.

As for people talking about "objectivity", don't make me laugh. All we have and all we'll ever have is subjectivity. Alan didn't like Prince's SNL performance, ok that's allowed. I liked it myself but I also thought he raised some good points in his criticism of it. I don't feel the need to assasinate his entire character because I disagree with him over something.

First of all if you did not think purplerabbit had good points then that is who you should have quoted and left me out of it to begin with.

Next time address the person you intended to debate and you wont have that problem.

SNL was one example put forward, but purple rabbit brought up several issues besides that which you apologists continue to willfully ignore, preferring to nitpick over minutiae as a deflection tactic. The reason I said "good points" is because didn't feel the need to be redundant by tap dancing and grandstanding when the point was already well made.

I was primarily addressing your LOL post directed at me.

I find purplerabbit's block of texts posts hard to read but i'll go back and try work through them below:

purplerabbithole said:

a grudge against the man is different than a grudge against his talent. Leeds knows Prince is talented. No one said otherwise. I actually liked Leeds when he did a Q and A on Prince in 2013. He seemed objective and relatively fair. But then I thought about it---how good of a source is someone who knew him 30 years ago. I can't remember much about my friends from high school and I am only in my early 40's. Obviously, he has mixed feelings about Prince--which I get. But he seemed to be in a pretty pissed off mood after that 2014 SNL performance and calling him on it seems fair to me.

I don't really disagree with any of this although that I don't think Alan has any grudge against Prince the man. He was heavily critical of the SNL performance - the performance - not the existence of the guy who was performing it.

As for the criticism itself, i'll address your points in your other post:

For one, Ms.. Smith enjoyed Prince's cover of her song.

So what? Whoever said she didn't? I liked 3EG a lot but i'd be kidding myself if I thought they were pushing the boat musically and dealt in anything but rock cliches. It was like rock music stopped in 1973 for them. They were good at what they did but mainly it was pastiche. The most modern thing about them was probably Donna's haircut.

For two, people Prince respects have covered HIS music and Leeds damn well knows that to be a fact.

Prince was very weird about people covering his music, you must realise that. He seemed to have the opinion that you had to get his permission to do a cover. Fair enough, he was close to alone in this opinion, and in his occasional legal enforcement of it, but he was allowed have it. I have never heard another musician talk about covers in that way. I'd imagine he did get permission himself though, Alan should have realised this.

Third, fake concerns over Prince's clothes are trivial after the fact here. If the rest of the public didn't care (hell, they are used to it) why should he? No one walked away from that acclaimed performance, saying "gee, I would have listened to that performance but I couldn't get past those gawdy clothes".

What does this even mean? He was expressing his opinion, not the opinion of most of the public. He didn't say "here's what everyone in the world thinks about this performance". Besides which, we all have many stories and threads on here about people not taking Prince seriously because they can't get past the clothes. Personally, I like the clothes and i'm glad Prince was always weird, but if Alan thought it held P back then he's allowed say that.

Fourth, he actually criticized Prince for underutilizing a talented singer. Damn, I thought it was a Prince performance. He had 8 fucking minutes of time to do his gig. What is he going to do--give a whole song to this woman?

Yeah, I kinda agree with you on that one. Although maybe Prince could have chosen to try and squeeze less songs in his 8 minutes? He could even have included a second song Lianne La Havas could sing on, since she was there and all and is a great singer. I thought the pacing was a bit off for this performance and agree with Alan that Prince tried to fit too much into 8 minutes.

Its funny how he spends all his time bitching about what he thinks Prince left out of the overall performance, his clothes, and the amount of time he gave to the female guest appearances, but never explains what is actually wrong with Prince's performance..(was his singing uninspired, were his guitar skills lacking, were his lyrics ridiculous or was it just that Prince wasn't with the Revolution and his brother anymore?)

Well, leaving aside your own personal attacks at the end there, that's not true. He said the problems with the performance were

a) Prince trying to do too much with 8 mins
b) Prince's clothes distracting from the music
c) Underutilizing Lianne Le Havas

d) 3rd Eye Girl in general being a fairly drab, standard rock band and not up to Prince's standards leading to a "trivial" cover version.

For what it's worth I think he was right with A, wrong with B, possibly right with C and a bit unfair with D since that basic rock stuff was what Prince wanted with his music at the time.

[Edited 11/1/16 17:26pm]

Noodled24 said:

wonder505 said:

Noodled24 said: Oh i get it. You can't counteract my points so now you gonna pretend you didn't read my post where I corrected that he did use the word "shame" which you can see for yourself in the tumblr link I posted. And if you go back to read his statement it did come off as Alan regarding the performance as shameful. My point is that in the grand scheme of what was happening at the time his comment was over the top...IMO

If you want to twist things and believe Alan was actually saying it was a "shameful performance". That's fine. You can think that... Not actually what he said though is it? You put those words in his mouth.

My assessment of Alan's statement is not twisted at all if you read his entire statement. He used words like "shame" and "a master lowering the bar" "leave the cartoon logos and costumes."

I did not put words in his mouth. I used quotes to express how Alan sounded and in clarified in a follow up post that it was not a direct quote. I actually had the balls to do so in reply#105, unlike you who continue runaway from debating us on key points. You're gonna hold on to this put words in Alan's mouth thing because you are incapable of defending yourself against key points that were made.

[Edited 11/1/16 17:22pm]

babynoz said:

wonder505 said:

Thanks purplerabbithole. Great points.

Notice that after repeatedly asking for a specific, detailed criticism of Leed's comments, they get exactly that and now they keep tap dancing and never address any of the points that purplerabbithole made?

That's the thing. Instead of counteracting an awesome well written post he comments on the length of his posts

[Edited 11/1/16 17:20pm]

jaawwnn said:

a) Prince trying to do too much with 8 mins
b) Prince's clothes distracting from the music
c) Underutilizing Lianne Le Havas

d) 3rd Eye Girl in general being a fairly drab, standard rock band and not up to Prince's standards

For what it's worth I think he was right with A, wrong with B, possibly right with C and a bit unfair with D since they were what Prince wanted with his music at the time.

[Edited 11/1/16 17:24pm]

Actually b) seemed like a strange statement considering Prince was always about the clothes and the music was so good that we saw the past clothes or somehow as someone pointed out, theo outfits were an extension of his musical expression.

I did not see how Lianne Le Havas was underutlized. Clouds in itself is not an easy song to sing live and Prince' keyboard work was impressive to me.

wonder505 said:

jaawwnn said:

Actually b) seemed like a strange statement considering Prince was always about the clothes and the music was so good that we saw the past clothes or somehow as someone pointed out, theo outfits were an extension of his musical expression.

I did not see how Lianne Le Havas was underutlized. Clouds in itself is not an easy song to sing live and Prince' keyboard work was impressive to me.

I can see where Alan is coming from: why bring Lianne Le Havas, a super talented woman with a career of her own, all the way to a SNL performance and then just use her for about 10 seconds? Seems a waste of talent.

She was probably just doing it as a favour for a friend though, that's cool too.

babynoz said:

wonder505 said:

My assessment of Alan's statement is not twisted at all if you read his entire statement. He used words like "shame" and "a master lowering the bar" "leave the cartoon logos and costumes."

"A shame" - is not the same as "a shameful performance". Even here you're selectively editing what Alan said.

You claimed he said "Prince, look at the shameful musician/performer you have become, you needed to do what I told you to do 20 years ago" - but you'd actually just re-written what Alan actually said to suit your own agenda. YOU referered to Prince as a shameful musician.

I did not put words in his mouth. I used quotes to express how Alan sounded and in clarified in a follow up post that it was not a direct quote. I actually had the balls to do so, unlike you who continue runaway from debating us on key points. You're gonna hold on to this put words in Alan's mouth thing because you are incapable of defending yourself against key points that were made.

A wild tangent about a film completely unrelated to Prince or Alan Leeds is not a key point in a discussion about Alan Leeds despite what your friend who pops up every few posts to contribute nothing thinks. We don't need to talk in metaphors we can talk facts.

Noodled24 said:

Did you not say this lovely thing; "Also he worked for Prince in a professional capacity but they were obviously friends too. Or as close as Prince had to friends.". the dude lived 57 years and you question whether he ever had a friend in the entirety of his life. Kind of dogging him there, don't you think?

I will leave it at that because my metaphors are confusing apparently.

Noodled24 said:

Purplestar88 said:

... I can't tell if you're being childish or stupid? We've been over this for the past 2 pages.

What does that have to do with anything. Prince has an impressive resume too and people dog him. The biographers can come to him and people can and will decided how they feel about his statements and actions.

Again. Nobody in this thread has dogged Prince. Except where people have put words in Alan's mouth so they could dog Prince.

[Edited 11/1/16 19:16pm]

[Edited 11/1/16 20:06pm]

[Edited 11/1/16 20:20pm]

Because the guest star was Prince, because her vocals are not the only vocals on recording. Why have SNL invite Prince to perform on a show and half his set is someone else? Maybe, she was just honored to work with a veteran like Prince (like you said).. Maybe, they are friends. I hate to say it but prior to that performance, I didn't know who she was. I was impressed however. I have seen famous singers have guest appearances on rap songs all the time and no one seemed to care.

Leeds might have one point--Prince should have just focused on two songs. However, that would have exclued Lianne because you could bet your ass that people would expect both songs to have Prince as the lead. Prince was probably did that many songs because he was promoting two albums at the same time and because he wanted to wail on the guitar.

jaawwnn said:

wonder505 said:

I can see where Alan is coming from: why bring Lianne Le Havas, a super talented woman with a career of her own, all the way to a SNL performance and then just use her for about 10 seconds? Seems a waste of talent.

She was probably just doing it as a favour for a friend though, that's cool too.

[Edited 11/1/16 20:03pm]

a) Prince trying to do too much with 8 mins
b) Prince's clothes distracting from the music
c) Underutilizing Lianne Le Havas

d) 3rd Eye Girl in general being a fairly drab, standard rock band and not up to Prince's standards leading to a "trivial" cover version.

I will respond to this...

He was not nearly as kind of you are here.

a.) okay, legit concern

b.) the clothes only distract from the talent when people aren't even giving his work a chance. My point is that they are watching him perform right there. And his clothes are not enough to distract from his talent when its evident to everyone. I mentioned other people's reactions because they obviously don't give a shit about the clothes.

c.) Lianne Le Havas is not who the people paid to see. I like when he helps young talent, but he is the draw.

d.) I like the band. What would be a good enough band for him. Never mind, I can guess. There are less original and more derivative bands than theirs. And I don't recall him being as specific about his issues with the performance. He doesn't like the cover of Another Love. But when does he discuss the original songs.

YOur reasonable reactions still don't change the fact that Leeds says nothing about Prince's original songs, songwriting, singing, or guitar playing in that performance. He acts as if Prince's just butchered the performance. Damn, his standards are high.

jaawwnn said:

babynoz said:

Yeah, I kinda agree with you on that one. Although maybe Prince could have chosen to try and squeeze less songs in his 8 minutes? He could even have included a second song Lianne La Havas could sing on, since she was there and all and is a great singer. I thought the pacing was a bit off for this performance and agree with Alan that Prince tried to fit too much into 8 minutes.

Its funny how he spends all his time bitching about what he thinks Prince left out of the overall performance, his clothes, and the amount of time he gave to the female guest appearances, but never explains what is actually wrong with Prince's performance..(was his singing uninspired, were his guitar skills lacking, were his lyrics ridiculous or was it just that Prince wasn't with the Revolution and his brother anymore?)

Well, leaving aside your own personal attacks at the end there, that's not true. He said the problems with the performance were

a) Prince trying to do too much with 8 mins
b) Prince's clothes distracting from the music
c) Underutilizing Lianne Le Havas

d) 3rd Eye Girl in general being a fairly drab, standard rock band and not up to Prince's standards leading to a "trivial" cover version.

For what it's worth I think he was right with A, wrong with B, possibly right with C and a bit unfair with D since that basic rock stuff was what Prince wanted with his music at the time.

[Edited 11/1/16 17:26pm]

jaawwnn said:

I was primarily addressing your LOL post directed at me.

That isn't true because you are the one who came at me first with a lot of sarcasm. I was replying to purplerabbithole and had not said anything to you at all. The only reason I replied to you is because YOU quoted my comment. See below.....

babynoz said:

Purplestar88 said:

Alan and others have criticized Prince's music after his "80's heyday". So it is very relevant. Prince did not disappeared into oblivion because he move on.

Alan is credible on the time he spent with Prince. He can not speak on things he was not there for. I am not saying he cannot comment on what was going on with Prince recently but it's not ok comment like your in the mix and your not. No one wants to be judged on things they did in their 20's or younger, that not fair. I don't believe he is honest in everything he states about Prince. People lie and tried to take credit for things they did not do. I think Alan beef with Prince is that he could not control and tell Prince what to do.

A person can not be completly credible if they are bias and hold a grudge. I feel this is the case with Alan. Sometimes I wish people would consider what it was like to be a young man in the music industry.

Good points.

Not really.

Alan doesn't speak for things he wasn't there for, he doesn't "pass judgement" like you won't be allowed buy a Prince album if Alan doesn't like it. Please provide some evidence that Alan is lying and taking credit for things he didn't do as is strongly implied by that post.

I have never seen any evidence of a grudge; people ask his opinion, he gives it. As well as being critical he has also consistently praised Prince's work. For example, even at his most critical of Prince in that Q&A thread he said the following of prince's new music:

I have no doubt that he can still stumble on a brilliant new song in his sleep. His effortless command of the stage and awesomely rich catalogue will always lure ticket buyers into any venue he chooses to visit. We music fans will always be richer for his presence.

God, I know right, such bitterness, what a grudge. SHAKING MY HEAD.

AbstractPoetic91 said:

babynoz said:

Prince was dogged on here like a leper, often just as a result of some entitled assclown having a tantrum about not getting some remasters or other such pettiness.

As I've said before an will continue to say, he took more abuse around here than all of his associates combined so ALL of them and every one of their apologists can cry me a river.

Girl folks on this website are stuck in a time warp. While I do enjoy Leeds stories, Like anything else I take it with a grain of salt. I'm seeing too much fakery with a lot of these former associates of Prince. For example, I like Apples a lot and I even follow her on twitter but I feel at times she tends to be over the top with her "love" for Prince. To where even I'm like "bitch really?" Everybody and they mama dated Prince and/or was a part of his purple harem. One thing I always thought was interesting was how come no one ever asked Clarence Williams III about his experience working with Prince?

And there it is......

Imma call 'em out when they come out of their mouth wrong, no matter who it is and no matter who gets salty and butt-hurt about it.

I did see a comment from Clarence but I cant remember where. The one I'm most surprised about not hearing anything from is Jay Leno.

babynoz said:

jaawwnn said:

I was primarily addressing your LOL post directed at me.

That isn't true because you are the one who came at me first with a lot of sarcasm. I was replying to purplerabbithole and had not said anything to you at all. The only reason I replied to you is because YOU quoted my comment. See below.....

Oh lord. I accept your correction that good quoting etiquette was not followed the second time I responded. I apologise.

The first time I was addressing your response that they were "good points" by explaining why I thought they were not. Both you and purplerabbithole were being responded to there, i'm sure purplerabbithole understands this. There's no law against being sarcastic.

[Edited 11/1/16 20:27pm]

jaawwnn said:

babynoz said:

That isn't true because you are the one who came at me first with a lot of sarcasm. I was replying to purplerabbithole and had not said anything to you at all. The only reason I replied to you is because YOU quoted my comment. See below.....

Oh lord. I accept your correction that good quoting etiquette was not followed the second time I responded. I apologise.

The first time I was addressing your response that they were "good points" by explaining why I thought they were not. Both you and purplerabbithole were being responded to there, i'm sure purplerabbithole understands this. There's no law against being sarcastic.

[Edited 11/1/16 20:27pm]

Just be prepared to take what you dish out then....

Sure, if we can do more than discuss the semantics of who is responding to who.

wonder505 said:

Noodled24 said:

A wild tangent about a film completely unrelated to Prince or Alan Leeds is not a key point in a discussion about Alan Leeds despite what your friend who pops up every few posts to contribute nothing thinks. We don't need to talk in metaphors we can talk facts.

The metaphors were used to support the posters feelings why Alan Leeds comments were over top. Its obviously way over your head which is why you're running away from it.

Metaphors aren't needed when discussing FACTS. They're just a way to divert the conversation because someone can't actually back up what they're saying so they insert a metaphor in which their theory fits.

Sorry buddy, but Alan Leeds will never be spared criticism. You may have to get used to it.

Same goes for Prince.

purplerabbithole said:

Did you not say this lovely thing; "Also he worked for Prince in a professional capacity but they were obviously friends too. Or as close as Prince had to friends.". the dude lived 57 years and you question whether he ever had a friend in the entirety of his life. Kind of dogging him there, don't you think?

Why? Becaue I didn't make up facts about who Prince's friends were?

I will leave it at that because my metaphors are confusing apparently.

Confusing in the sense that, you have no idea on when they're appropriate.

But since you like them so much you should get on the phone to the natural history museum and tell them they don't know what they're talking about. Sure they've been able to reconstruct the bones of a T-REX but they weren't actually there were they? So by your logic these scientists have no credibility.

Noodled24 said:

wonder505 said:

Noodled24 said:

Sorry buddy, but Alan Leeds will never be spared criticism. You may have to get used to it.

Same goes for Prince.

Metaphors aren't needed when discussing FACTS. They're just a way to divert the conversation because someone can't actually back up what they're saying so they insert a metaphor in which their theory fits.

Sorry buddy, but Alan Leeds will never be spared criticism. You may have to get used to it.

Same goes for Prince.

Yes we do. Metaphors are great at highlighting points. Its obviously way over your head. The FACTS are in Alan's entire statement and we responded to his statement. Just because it was negative, you getting your feelings hurt. The FACT is that Alan has not spoken to or dealt with Prince in 20 years, and because we called him out on it, you crying like a baby.

and yes, I'm used to Prince getting criticism, he got mercilessly criticized here alive and in death. YOU need to get used to Alan getting called out cuz he aint getting spared.

[Edited 11/2/16 8:35am]