L4OATheOriginal said:

Everything in your post is right on

But for him financially it didn't help him. Especially when it was time to tour for Lovesexy the stage set up was really costly and financially he was starting to dip low, Graffiti Bridge was an even greater financial and career low, Diamonds & Pearls helped bring back some much need monetary assistance.

But moving on so quickly when he could have promoted that album as well as others a bit further could have helped big time. You start changing up too much and it looses people, new look new band new album every year can wear on the fans & consumers of Princedom. Also when the money got low there were more problems created with WB as well as paying technicians, video / stage crew, musicians etc etc
[Edited 4/27/09 10:07am]

Riverpoet31 said:

Because singles pulled from albums serve no other purpose except promote that album.

Around The World In A Day was an album. Not a single. I already said that ALBUMS and VIDEOS are artistic statements. Pulling particular singles from albums is not.





Again, Parade was an album. It wasn't a single from an existing album.



Again, you're only proving my point, not disputing it.

How so? How many copies of Sign of the Times do you think were sold as a result of the fact that If I Was Your Girlfriend was pulled to be a single? The album's chart performance went DOWN while that single was out. The single itself topped out at #64 on the charts or some such.



Seems like you're only argument for it chosing If I Was Your Girlfriend as a single to be an 'artistic' statement is the fact that he didn't shoot a video to go along with the single release. But he could have not shot a video with ANY single. I don't see how not shooting a video makes the choice of a particular track as a single an artistic statement.




I get THAT very well. What you don't seem to get is that none of those 'artistically driven choices' you mentioned above (which I agree that they were artistic-driven choices) were the choice of which track gets to be the next single.

Singles pulled from albums are promotional devices for those albums. Nothing more. If we were talking about a stand-alone single, or even one that been dramatically altered (editing and/or overdubs) for the single release, you'd have an argument to make about the artistic nature of that single. But making "If I Was Your Girlfriend" the 2nd single from that album was nothing more than a way to try to get that song played on the radio as a means to promote the album. And since radio didn't play the song, hardly anyone bought the single, and the album's sales sagged during the period it was out, there's no way to describe the choice of that song as a single as anything but a mistake.

Riverpoet31 said:

I'd really have to disagree with that. ATWIAD and Parade may have been experimental in nature, as albums, but he plainly chose the more straight ahead tracks as single releases the majority of the time.

If he was attempting to release singles for "artistic purposes" only, then I think we'd seen things like Christopher Tracy's Parade or The Ballad of Dorothy Parker released and remixed to high heaven.

As has been pointed out, singles only serve the purpose of promoting an album. If they fail in that regard then they fail on all levels because no one hears the "artistic statement".

I think IIWYG was simply an unintentional misstep. Prince may have thought it's stripped down nature and edgy delivery would appeal to the same market that ate up When Doves Cry or Kiss.



There were no videos for SOTT or IIWYG because Prince was having a snit with Mtv for banning Jill Jones Mia Bocca video from their playlists.... this was reported widely at the time. The video for Sign only exists due to the insistence of the label, if I recall correctly.

You're just romanticizing past events.

jtfolden said:

Why was Mia Bocca banned? Was it the young boys checking her out?

I never knew why MTV banned "Mia Bocca".The video isn't nasty/controversial/offensive at all.

I think it was the video for "G-Spot" that MTV wouldn't play.

keywhiz said:

probably. Mia bocca was on tv all the time, great song, great video.

I didn't know she made a video for "G-Spot"! Has anyone ever seen it?

keywhiz said:

No, it was Mia Bocca and I do believe it is because of the children in it.

OldFriends4Sale said:

You're not making a lot of sense...

A double album is a double album. If it was released as 2 lp's on vinyl, it qualifies as such.

MartyMcFly said:

Your not trying to understand

I made a lot of sense
SOTT was his first office Double Album (double the songs) I said this in reference to him not promoting this album of 17 songs because of that.

1999 was a double album, I did not say it wasn't a double album
But not in the way SOTT was.
1999 still is only a double album (ONLY) because the songs were released in there extended form. not because it had double the songs usually released on an album. Again Parade had more songs than 1999 but it wasn't a double album.
[Edited 4/23/09 6:26am]

MartyMcFly said:

I SO agree myself and I was saying the same dam thing

toots said:

Get over yourself

U know I usually ignore U because your a person of strife
[Edited 4/23/09 6:28am]

OldFriends4Sale said:

Sorry but YOU never mentioned double songs ONLY DOUBLE albumin ur original statement so get over YOURSELF

And that IS the point 3 of us are making hold on illedit this message when i find WHAT you said and ill state what POST K



Post 47 3rd page dear you mention NOTHING of double songs lol

btw I speak truth and you dont like it do you so get over yourself.
[Edited 4/23/09 6:35am]

People people!

Can't we all just get along?

toots said:[quote]

OldFriends4Sale said:

you just can't leave me only can U,
your so argumentative, every post you take part in ends in an arguement
My original post had nothing to do with trying to prove 1999 wasn't a double album
It was about Prince promoting SOTT an album that truly was a 'double' album because of the amount of songs

I didn't have to put all that in my original post, but people like you like to make a mountain out of a mole hill

[Bait snip - luv4u]

OldFriends4Sale said:

1999 was his first, official double album. I double album is based on total TIME and number of discs - NOT on number of songs.


You've even admitted this yourself. Parade was NOT a double album, even though it had more tracks, because it all fit on a single disc.

Let's all get along folks

I've got a Joe Jackson album and a Utopia album that each have 3 sides on 2 discs.

Are those double albums or single albums?

jtfolden said:

didn't I say it was based on the time, that the songs were released in an extended form?

OldFriends4Sale said:

Whatever that right above means, I didn't write it

toots said:[quote]

OldFriends4Sale said:

I didn't have to sayin anything about double songs because I know that SOTT had double songs. That's why I said what I said.

toot toot away speaker of truth

OldFriends4Sale said:

You also stated:


...but the number of songs is mostly irrelevant.

jtfolden said:

I've got a copy of Bitches Brew that has 6 songs and runs about 94 minutes over 4 sides.

I guess that's a single album cuz it only has 6 tracks?
[Edited 4/23/09 16:45pm]

Mindflux said:

I agreed with most of your post dude, but feel people are entitled to air their thoughts and views, even if its 22yrs too late The benefit of hindsight makes for interesting reading most of the time

Its a small group that manages to follow their dreams to fruition (and we dont all need or want megastardom) Bills gotta get paid and people unwind in many different ways so your "virtually meaningless 9-5" comment was a bit harsh I feel.

JOYJOY said:

Yeah, was not a great day, so looking back it does come across a bit sour and harsh - sorry about that folks

My point about "meaningless 9-5" was alluding to significance in a much wider context, not how it is personally necessary and meaningful to the individual.

There's also nothing wrong with people analysing the past....I'm all for open debate about anything. But the conviction with which some people propose how they would go about being incredibly and uniquely creative whilst also managing a multi-million dollar business astounds me.

It is also a lot to do with perspective and where you were at the time - I think emesem(sp?) suggested that, had I been a fan in 1987, then I would know just how bad a decision the release of IIWYG was. Well, I've been a fan since 1984 and, here in the UK, 1987 was a fantastic year for Prince and IIWYG did very well. Prince's androgynous and eclectic nature was always better received and understood in Europe than elsewhere.

And those that suggest that perhaps the audience wasn't ready for such experimental, minimalistic pop tune are perhaps also those that weren't around at the time. At the point of IIWYG's release, the number one track in the UK (and US I think) was Wishing Well by Terence Trent D'Arby - very much in the vein of SOTT and IIWYG in its minimalism - so "empty" in fact, that most of the track could be considered a tone poem.

Oh, and Riverpoet31 - I meant to say, fantastic posts there! Spot on and well considered.

Singles aren't only released on a commericial basis - 99% of the time they are (in the pop mainstream arena anyway) but many singles throughout time have been released as an artistic statement. But, as usual, money and corporations win out and as we've seen the music industry lean ever more towards only commercial considerations, we've lost those magical artistic statements and been spoon-fed mareketed bilge!

Mindflux said:

well...except for that fact that he couldn't come up with a single example of a single being released from an album that was an "artistic statement" or explain how the act of releasing a single from an album COULD be an artistic statement, I suppose you might be correct...



Then perhaps YOU'D like to provide an example from this 1%?

It was his best set I seen it in Stuttgart Strassahaul in 87 and it was Fantastic Did not know he didnt tour the U.S. with that though

It would've been his best U.S. concert tour ever. Prince was at his heights live and musically at that time. he was just 29years old... A kick-ass tour but he didn't take advantage of it.