Oh boy. Before we all go half-cocked...

I love P.

But his studio stuff, as good as it is, sounds so tame compared to when he wails live.

The best recent example is "Fury" which on CD sounds...okay, but on SNL sounded like the second coming of the Guitar Gods.

In the Tamar shows, when he picks up one of his Fenders, he hits more guitar than most Eighties metal gods, but if you listen to his music, so little guitar remains.

It is me or have others felt that a lot of Prince's musicianship is unknown to the general public because he doesn't put it on wax?

There probably isn't a better, more dynamic live musician, but sometimes his studio work sounds empty in comparison.

a friend was showing me an old Prince rehearsal from the early '80s
and Prince was rocking out on guitar during half the songs
just having fun with his bandmates
and i was wondering as i was watching this
why did Prince so rarely ever show this side of himself to the public
the first time i even had an inkling
that he could do amazing things like this with seemingly little effort
was during the '87 and '88 aftershows

and that's another question...
"why are his aftershows almost always better than his large venue concerts?"
it's almost like there's this mask he puts on for the general public
and then from time to time, he takes it off to reveal who he truly is

he's an engima wrapped up inside a box
who's got the key to open the lock?

Because when he plays live he doesn't have the time to smother everything in layers and layers of keyboards, removing all of the "rough" edges from the music, so the songs sound so much more alive - a case in point is "Fury" when you compare the SNL or Brits performance with the album version.

Snap said:

That's a great question! The more I think about it, the more I realize the aftershows are AWESOME compared to large venue concets.

Oh well...

Came across this interesting article on the BBC website about how popstars earn far more these days from concerts than albums:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/h...896262.stm

Since the start of the 1980s, the superstar effect has become more pronounced in rock and pop, with a small number of performers taking an ever larger share of the spoils.

Research into the market in the US, where the trend started, has found that in 1982, the top 1% of artists received 26% of concert revenue. By 2003, that figure had gone up to 56%.

These days, the biggest concert draws tend to be performers such as Bowie, the Rolling Stones and Paul McCartney - artists whose latest albums are often greeted with indifference, but who can still make money by singing their greatest hits.

Does that mean an end to creativity in popular music? Not necessarily, says Professor Krueger.

"It should lead to more creativity in terms of live performances," he says. "A concert is more than just an artist at a microphone. Look at all the light shows at a U2 concert.

No wonder Prince keeps stuff back for the concerts, that's where the real money is made these days, and probably why he can't be bothered spending too much energy promoting the album.
[Edited 4/21/06 3:25am]

Because he is a REAL musician and that is where real musicians SHINE. It's really that simple.

....plus there are "rules" in the studio. The rules don't apply LIVE.

Graycap23 said:

Exactly, a true musician always sound better live in my opinion. Think about all these acts today who sound horrible on stage but better in the studio. Because they can hide behind all the computer tricks that make it sound good. You can't really hide on stage.

I believe that it is because he is a perfectionist and that in the studio he just keeps tweaking the crap out of his music until it takes a downward slide. During live shows, he doesn't have this opportunity and it sounds more earthy, real, and spontaneous. Plus his Princisms are pretty cool too, you know, "On the one, get goin', break down, on the saxophone, MACEO PARKER!"

Well, I understand the initial thought of this thread. However, I can't bring myself to agree as far as Prince's live stuff being better than the studio material across the board. There are lots of really cool things P has done in the studio that are almost impossible to duplicate live, or bring the same energy and focus. For example, I have never heard a live version of "The Ballad of Dorothy Parker" that moves me the same way that the recording does. Same thing for "When Doves Cry", or "7". These songs sound good live, but they don't make me wanna toss the recording. To each their own, I guess.

In today's profit-driven industry, there's one thing we as fans can count on. Prince will always bring the heat live. The man is no slacker onstage, and I am certainly grateful for that.

OdysseyMiles said:

Years ago when M2 was good Robyn(remember her?) was hosting an hour and she played a version of "When Doves Cry" from Japan that was incredibly funky. I was very impressed and never thought it could be done but there it was, a version that was almost as good as the original.

I think the way to get around studio recordings performed live is to just bring out the workstation onstage for parts that are obviously digital. For something like "WDC" it has obvious drum programming. So do drum programming onstage for that song.

I think between 80-95, Studio prince was equally as good as live prince. There were clear borders.

The studio created sounds that could not be easily reproduced live. The live performance produced a funk that he could not capture in the studio.

But now, I think the live comes accross far superior, because of the lack of effort to sound different in the studio. A lot of Princes studio material is simply played out on instruments that can be perfectly reproduced live.

As a result, the live performance now sounds like the current studio equivilent, but with more raw power. Hence it sounds better live.

What is also noticable is how bad some old hits sound when he tries to apply the bland production he has adopted more in the last ten years. Songs like raspberry beret and Take me with U sound almost lounge bar, as opposed to the anthems they can be.

I think what many of you fail to understand, is that Prince is trying to have a "Prince" style to his studio recordings that starts with him not mixing his songs in a conventional balance and tone. He likes for those quiet little percussion touches, and keyboard decorations to be the loud part (besides the beat) and he likes to turn down what would normally would be turned up, and make other things sound miniature. This is why his studios songs sound unique. He does a bit of this live, but ultimately his live stuff suffers form conventional arrangements and balance, which of course sound more "correct".

Days of Wild is a perfect example of this. The studio version is so original, but the live versions are very conventional in their style/ arrangment. I do love the premiere performance of this though (The BEautiful xperience concert), because Prince rarely lets his music sound so "BIG".

Graycap23 said:

EXACTLY!

Some of Prince's greatest work sounds best on record , its never been matched when its reproduced live ,I've yet to hear a version of When Doves Cry or Kiss
live that comes close to the brilliance of the original studio cut . Yes there are recent tracks that sound better live ,like Fury , but thats because the studio version isnt that great to start with and he rocks it hard when its played live , he's improving on an Ok song , not making something brilliant even better IMHO.