New topic
Printable| Author | Message |
Uptown's "The Vault 2006" so, is this an update edition, covering just 2004 and 2005 or is this once again, the entire book plus 2 more years? if it's the latter, i wish they'd have stuck to the plan of just releasing an update every year, instead of publishing the entire book with more pages. i'm getting tired of buying this same book every few years, even though it's worth it and extremely valuable. | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
just think of all the nice new typos we'll get to circle this year!  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Anx said: just think of all the nice new typos we'll get to circle this year!
 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
corrections and updates need to go on the pages where they belong -- not in a supplement
bring on The Vault 2006  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Why dont they do DMSR 1989-1999 ? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Snap said: corrections and updates need to go on the pages where they belong -- not in a supplement
bring on The Vault 2006 but wasn't that the rationale for discontinuing the magazine? that they'd put out the massive book to replace all the others, and then put out a supplement each year? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
TheAstonishing said: Snap said: corrections and updates need to go on the pages where they belong -- not in a supplement
bring on The Vault 2006 but wasn't that the rationale for discontinuing the magazine? that they'd put out the massive book to replace all the others, and then put out a supplement each year? well, news reports keep coming in from people who have been there throughout the years (did you read the Alan Leeds interview recently?) -- i'd prefer the updates and corrections be made within the sections they belong -- i don't want to have a supplement filled with cross-references that i'd have to pencil into the main book myself. i'd rather buy a whole new book that's been corrected and updated. orger 1: "well, i read the entry for 1984 and it never mentioned anything like that!!" orger 2: "it's in the supplement, dummy! didn't you read the part where it says on pg. 32, paragraph c, and line 3, it should state..." give me a whole new book [Edited 2/12/06 19:28pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
There's a report at Housequake which suggesting that the likelihood of a new book for 2006 is now low.
. ALT+PLS+RTN: Pure as a pane of ice. It's a gift. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
moderator
origmnd said: Why dont they do DMSR 1989-1999 ?
I pray that this will happen. Only if Per Neilsen does it again. He did a great job on the book. [Edited 2/13/06 1:31am] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I'm thinking of buying it. Is this a good idea? Advice, anyone?
I owned DMSR (before the fire), and haven't decided whether to replace it with a new copy + the Vault as well.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
langebleu said: There's a report at Housequake which suggesting that the likelihood of a new book for 2006 is now low.
. The Vault 2007 -- encompassing Prince's biggest year ever, 2006. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Thanks for the interest in The Vault everyone.
Please bear in mind that the whole Uptown team work on publications in their spare time and all hold down full time jobs. Whilst it would be great if we could all devote 100% of our time to the new edition that just isn't possible right now 
As mentioned on Housequake, it's highly unlikely that you'll see a new edition in 2006 but this is the world of Prince and stranger things have happened  I can promise you that the next edition is being worked on right now though.
As soon as there's any update, I promise to let you know but in the meantime the team appreciate your patience. Gavin | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Krystal666 said: origmnd said: Why dont they do DMSR 1989-1999 ?
I pray that this will happen. Only if Per Neilsen does it again. He did a great job on the book. Per's currently studying for a doctorate - the chances of him ever being able to produce the second volume of DMSR are extremely slim. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Gav said: Krystal666 said: I pray that this will happen. Only if Per Neilsen does it again. He did a great job on the book. Per's currently studying for a doctorate - the chances of him ever being able to produce the second volume of DMSR are extremely slim. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news that's cool...and good luck to per! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Snap said: TheAstonishing said: but wasn't that the rationale for discontinuing the magazine? that they'd put out the massive book to replace all the others, and then put out a supplement each year? well, news reports keep coming in from people who have been there throughout the years (did you read the Alan Leeds interview recently?) -- i'd prefer the updates and corrections be made within the sections they belong -- i don't want to have a supplement filled with cross-references that i'd have to pencil into the main book myself. i'd rather buy a whole new book that's been corrected and updated. orger 1: "well, i read the entry for 1984 and it never mentioned anything like that!!" orger 2: "it's in the supplement, dummy! didn't you read the part where it says on pg. 32, paragraph c, and line 3, it should state..." give me a whole new book
[Edited 2/12/06 19:28pm] so, more simply put, you like to waste money....  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
per should collaborate with another author for the DMSR follow-up...he seems to have the resources to get the book published (or at least the know-how) and he has a wealth of information, but clearly not the time to create the product. he could oversee the project as editor and let someone else do the production work and proofing. it'd be less work for him, and he could make a few bucks and keep the book line going.
just some thoughts.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
TheAstonishing said: Snap said: well, news reports keep coming in from people who have been there throughout the years (did you read the Alan Leeds interview recently?) -- i'd prefer the updates and corrections be made within the sections they belong -- i don't want to have a supplement filled with cross-references that i'd have to pencil into the main book myself. i'd rather buy a whole new book that's been corrected and updated. orger 1: "well, i read the entry for 1984 and it never mentioned anything like that!!" orger 2: "it's in the supplement, dummy! didn't you read the part where it says on pg. 32, paragraph c, and line 3, it should state..." give me a whole new book
[Edited 2/12/06 19:28pm] so, more simply put, you like to waste money.... don't forget... time is money too, and i have so little time to spend | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |