It's definately a question of where you live. I noticed you are from Israel so I can only imagine how different it would have been there compared to here in the United States.



I was first exposed to Prince on R&B radio and was still with R&B radio through all of this. Every now and then, I flipped to pop radio, and MTV and video shows like "Friday Night Videos", "Night Tracks", were all over the place so I was well aware of what was going on in the pop world also. In the early 1990s, when hip hop took over, I took all R&B stations off my dial and switched over to pop stations. The music I was into mostly at this time was underground house.

It has been the total opposite here. In the late 1980s, on the R&B side, ballads began taking over. Most of the large male groups that existed before had broken up and practically the only fast music that existed was synthesized "Prince-like" funk and fast uptempo rap. The tempo of rap that took over in the 1990s was underground back then.

On the pop side were artists like Madonna, George Michael, Tiffany, Robert Palmer, etc. Also, were the heavy metal hair bands. There was also R&B on the pop stations, but as usual, it was mostly the watered down weaker stuff that was intentionally made in hopes for pop appeal.

I noticed people on the R&B side, stripping down the music when gangsta hip hop came above ground. All the R&B singers had to strip theirs down also to be just as dull. On the pop side, I started noticing it after the Milli Vanilli scandal. Everyone had to do unplugged this and unplugged that just to prove they could actually play and sing. I got so bored I took ALL current stations off my dial and stuck strictly to the old stuff after that.



I saw a lot of the 1990s as Prince trying to win back a lot of the R&B fans that left him after "Purple Rain" by bringing in rappers. What he didn't realize though, is a lot of these people may have been into what was current in R&B in the 1980s but were no longer into what was current in the 1990s because it was not their style or taste. Hell, they had grown up on much better.

Ya'll in crazy denial.
Of course Prince would have had more success. His stuff would have been mainstream and the radio would have played him more, Mtv would have played him more. He wouldn't hvae dropped off the radar and people would take him more seriously. Art is personal and I'm not going to say he should have gone that way, but I would have certainly kept up with his music if it had the formula I liked. The new music is pretty uneventful for me. Nothing groundbreaking. Nothing very interesting.

brothaluv said:

Man,I totally agree! I know this is an unpopular opinion,but I think ATWIAD was a mess.A very weak follow-up to 'Purple Rain'.By changing his sound so quickly,Prince allowed lame acts like Ready For The World to come along,steal his sound and outsell him in the process.Don't get me wrong,I totally support the idea of artistic evolution.But I think Prince changed too soon and the pop audience couldn't keep up.

mschirmer said:

Imagine if,in 1985,Prince brought out an album containing stuff like "Extra Lovable","The Dance Electric","Moonbeam Levels",etc,it would have been HUGE.

Of course they haven't had the sales or success that Prince has. Most of them were never crossover artists, which I admire the hell out of them for, but that's why they are not as successful. No they weren't and never will be as successful as Prince.

He could've kept the same formula as Purple Rain, but I'm glad he didn't. I'm glad he did an about face and gave everyone the finger. But at the end of the day, Around The Wolrd In A Day isn't a bad album. Sure, it's different, but it's still funky, just in another form. And it's not really that far removed from Purple Rain either.

I like when artists turn around and make an album that's entirely different (in a good way. Although I don't like this new direction The Chili Peppers have headed for example). It happened with Neil Young, Talking Heads, The Specials, Pink, Beastie Boys, Dexy's Midnight Runners, John Coltrane, The Clash, The Beatles, Marianne Faithfull, The Cure, just to name a few. They all made albums that sounded unlike what the audiences were used to because they wanted to take another step, or felt influenced to change their style so they could remain fresh and not get old quickly.

It's only an unpopular opinion around here. Most people that are not members of prince.org, Housequake, or any Prince site, that actually were around and lived through this era, would totally agree.

Damn right. That's the kind of stuff people were expecting and wanting. Also tracks like "Heaven".

OdysseyMiles said:

Great point. Heck, Jimmy Jam went so far as to criticise Prince for recycling too many ideas on ATWIAD.

vainandy said:

I was actually living in AUstralia throughout the 80s.




Which is what I said - evrything you've discussed related to "R&B" only. There were other things going on in music - and P was aware of them. He's always had broader influences even if he denies them now (Stones, Joni Mitchell,the whole Rude Boy punk stuff + rockabilly - and these were all from the period you eulogize).



As I said, you're really only paying to R&B and stuff at the top of the charts - in fact, even in R&B you're talking about what was mainstream, and not cutting edge. The main thing about P int he 80s was he seemed always 1 step ahead. I agree with OMiles who said above he was probably just doing what he wanted not TRYING to make trends, but that's what real trensetters do. You're comments above simply prove my point. From the mid- to late-eighties alternative and innovative stuff was getting stripped back (in the early eighties the alternative was synth-oriented, cf Kraftwerk, New Order, Prince etc.). You seem only to have noticed by the time that became the norm (turn of the decade, early nineties), by which time P had in fact moved on to other things. Your citing Milli Vanilli, Tiffany etc. prove the point - these are artists who ride waves with zero creative input and no innovation (I would say the same for Madonna and GM, but there'll probably b dissenters).

Universaluv said:

I never knew that.

The bit I love is that Prince could have gone either way - released what he wanted to or release what others thought he should.

Which side of the fence I fall on is irrelevant.

Just 20 years later, people are still pissed off with his decisions.

You gotta hand it to him...

vainandy said:

Thank you! Finally....somebody sees the light. The problem with fans is that often they lose their objectivity when evaluating their beloved artist.

OdysseyMiles said:

A number of: its tracks, as Jimmy Jam once pointed out, are musical retreads – "The Ladder" "Purple Rain","America" of the "Baby I’m a Star" groove; "Paisley Park" of the slow version of the Beatles’ "Revolution."

http://www.theprincepages...rticle.htm

brothaluv said:

The only problem with this statement is that people who aren't members of prince.org, housequake, or any Prince site wouldn't be having this conversation to begin with.
[Edited 11/23/05 9:12am]

DavidEye said:

standing ovation

vainandy said:

preach it

<--of the faithful

We may disagree over minutaie. But the consensus is Prince is one of the greatest entertainers of all time. HIs talent has touched us all and will continue to do so. Whatever direction he goes in the future, we're all be there with him...

every musician from jimi to miles has faced this same question and the answer is....maybe he would've had some success bein a puppet/jukebox, but we all know he wouldn't have been happy. for the simple fact that he would've defeated his reason 4 becoming a musician which is about evolution, growth, and change.

vainandy said :
brothaluv said :
skywalker said :

Quite an accomplishment to be so sure to know ALL the overall thoughts & opinions of ALL the users & non-users of Prince forums
.
.
.
[Edited 11/23/05 14:49pm]

brothaluv said:

That was exactly the point that I was trying to make with my earlier post. Change has been a fantastic hallmark of the man's career and no one should be arguing against that per say. Rather as you said, the timing of going in recognizably different directions when there was so much to be gained by simply being the best at what was bringing so many wannabe's and associates success for at least one or two more albums, while slipping in fresher stuff that would serve as orientation for the sounds that he would inevitably move into would have been the best thing he could have done. It would have definitely placed him in an even higher echelon of musical legend. With all due respect to those who are content with things "as is", that's really not the issue. The issue is opportunity missed. I am aware that alot of this may smack of backseat quarterbacking after the fact but in truth many of us in my circle of friends were lamenting about this same thing during the very years that we're discussing now.
[Edited 11/23/05 22:02pm]

vainandy said:
"I saw a lot of the 1990s as Prince trying to win back a lot of the R&B fans that left him after "Purple Rain" by bringing in rappers. What he didn't realize though, is a lot of these people may have been into what was current in R&B in the 1980s but were no longer into what was current in the 1990s because it was not their style or taste. Hell, they had grown up on much better."


Amen brother, AMEN! Now that was on point.
[Edited 11/23/05 22:13pm]

skywalker said:

Co-sign! One of the things about Prince that set's him apart is his progression from one album to the next, he doesn't do the obvious musically.

wasitgood4u said:



Oh, you are so right! Channels like MTV and pop stations, as well as shows like "Friday Night Videos" and "Night Tracks" were so full of funk and R&B that it's a wonder if "Soul Train" even survived. Finding some pop/rock on these shows was rare because R&B had just taken over them.




Well, here is Billboard's pop, not R&B, top ten singles for the year 1985.....

1 CARELESS WHISPER, Wham! Featuring George Michael (Columbia) (#1, Feb)
2 LIKE A VIRGIN, Madonna (Sire) (#1, Dec 1984)
3 WAKE ME UP BEFORE YOU GO-GO, Wham! (Columbia) (#1, Nov 1984)
4 I WANT TO KNOW WHAT LOVE IS, Foreigner (Atlantic) (#1, Feb)
5 I FEEL FOR YOU, Chaka Khan (Warner Brothers) (#3, Nov 1984)
6 OUT OF TOUCH, Daryl Hall and John Oates (RCA) (#1, Dec 1984)
7 EVERYBODY WANTS TO RULE THE WORLD, Tears For Fears (Mercury) (#1, June)
8 MONEY FOR NOTHING, Dire Straits (Warner Brothers) (#1, Sept)
9 CRAZY FOR YOU, Madonna (Sire) (#1, May)
10 TAKE ON ME, A-Ha (Warner Brothers) (#1, Oct)

You are so right again, everything in here is alternative and stripped back. In case you're wondering where Prince was on this chart, "Raspberry Beret" was at number 51.

Don't be too sure of that. Any time a group of music lovers get together and discuss music from the 1980s, Prince's name is going to come up many times because he was a part of this era. And oh, the things I have heard about the late 1980s Prince.

That's true. I don't know though, if he ever does a country album, I may drop his ass like a hotcake.
.
.
[Edited 11/24/05 4:34am]

vainandy said:

God, I'm all for Prince's diversity but I might have to agree with you there.

DiamondGirl said:

I have this book which describes much of Prince his performances .
He actually played " Dance Electric " a lot on stage , including co-appearances of Andre Cymone , Mazarati and Sheila E .... how i would have liked to attend those jams .
This track really got me hooked when i first heard it , because of that pulsating rhythm-effect and the electro-voiced " Dance ! "-chant , followed by a snarling synthesiser .
.
.
.
[Edited 11/24/05 5:15am]

vainandy said:

No you wouldn't! You'd be along for the ride like the rest of us. You might as well face it, we're all Prince fanatics. Hopelessly addicted...