i know this has been talked about many times on here but i still dont know the full story to this....maybe we can get our collective heads around this question and find out the real answer to the questions.....ARE WE GOING TO GET REMASTERED ALBUMS ? (which are badly needed) dont think there is ANY major artist who hasnt had it done to their older albums that i can think of so IF WE AINT GOING TO GET REMASTERS , WHY NOT ? ...
..
so far as i can tell....remasters wont come out because of the long running dispute between warners and prince about ownership of the master tapes of the albums that he did for them and they BOTH need to agree on this or nothing will happen .....anyone know if this is fact????.....
.....the info i have heard so far on this is that prince gets his master tapes back from warners 35 years AFTER they were originally released....anyone know if this is indeed 100 % correct ???.....
.....if the last two points are correct then we will have to wait a good few more years before the possibility of remastered albums can become a reality and only if prince himself wants it to happen ???? ( why does this make me think it will NEVER happen then )...
..
..if this is all true then maybe the best thing that could happen is warners strike some kind of deal with prince that they get to release the new polished albums and prince gets his master tapes back .....
.
.
my belief is that once prince gets his master tapes back...we might NEVER see the albums get the deluxe treatment they deserve and badly need and his loyal followers badly want...
[Edited 5/2/09 6:58am]

Yeah, it would appear that albums to which Prince owns the masters aren't kept in print.

blackbob said:

35 years?
Hmm. 1978 + 35 -> 2013?
If you know this, why be so impatient?

At this point, I'd settle for remasters of SOTT, Parade and Purple Rain.


SOTT being the album most in need of mastering. You have to listen to it very loud and with really good equipment to fully appreciate all the things going on in this songs. Although it's sparse compared to the multi-layered PR, ATWIAD and PARADE, it's sounds much more thin than it actually is due to poor sound quality.
It's a stellar work of genius--it deserves to be heard remastered.


The fan "remasters" of SOTT pop and sizzle in ways the original doesn't--but I'd like to hear an official remastered release.

udo said:

.
.
two reasons...one...that means that it will be at least 2015 before his first REAL album 'dirty mind' gets the treatment and 2019 ?? (10 feckin years ) before 'purple rain ' gets it.....too long .....and two....i dont trust prince to do it and do it properly....would rather warners did it and did it in the next year or two....

Wow, so 4 years until For You may get a remastered release!!!

Ideally Prince would strike a deal with a major/distributor to release a remastered album (plus bonus goodies!) every year as each album master reverts to him.

that would be a nice way to delay the supply so peops don't get to bogged down in too many remasters at once. So he could release a new album plus remaster every year!!!

I think what would be great is a one disk remaster of the original album with a few extras (b-sides etc) for the mainstream and a 2 or 3 disk special edition for the hardcore fans with loads of unreleased stuff on them.

blackbob said:

Aside from Born To Run, Springsteen hasn't yet remastered his albums, so there's at least on other.

As others have pointed out, there really isn't anythinng wrong with the CD issues we have already. They may be quiet, but that's what the volume control on your stereo is for, right? The current trend in remastering can be boiled down to little more than compressing the hell of stuff, making it really loud, but reducing the dynamic range drastically. The result is clipping and fatigue of the ears, not something you want, as much as you might think you do. If you're interest, there's an excellent article on this subject here:

http://www.stylusmagazine...orever.htm

That's not to say that proper, delicate remastering can't be done, but it's incresing uncommon these days. Given that the discussions of reissue packages around here tend to invariably focus on the bonus material we'd like to see added to these albums, I think fans should put their hopes behind Prince eventually opening the Vault, rather than encourage him to mess with albums that don't need any tweaking.

at this point, I don't even care too much any more about unreleased bonus stuff being added.

I wish Warner (or Rhino, who handled "Ultimate") would just work out a deal with him to remaster the albums with a bonus disc of everything associated with it. remixes, extended version, single edits, etc. split the profits 50/50 with him and still let ownership revert to him when it normally would.

because the last thing I want is Prince in control of this process, re-mixing, re-recording, censoring his old work, etc. if he wants to donate a bonus unreleased track or two, even better, but I'd just settle for the original albums and single versions being remastered and re-released as is without unreleased material instead of him deciding how they should be done.

he's often a very poor decision maker when it comes to his own music.

and I think WB could probably work out that kind of deal with him instead of waiting, an album at a time, for the 35 year timeline to expire for each one.
[Edited 5/2/09 8:16am]

lotusflw3r said:

.
.
thats IF he does it....remember he is a different person from the one that made 'dirty mind'....he might not allow it to be reissued due to the lyrics...or anything else that is not allowed by JW's .....

The word 'ownership' is often misapplied in this matter.

It's quite likely that technically Prince still legally owns the master recordings. However, he has probably assigned rights under his contract with WB to the use of the recordings. This means that it's quite possible that WB could only issue the recordings as they stand i.e. they could only issue remastered versions with the agreement of Prince.

It's also possible that Prince physically owns the master recordings. Given that he is unlikely to allow WB to do anything further with them, that means that it is also possible that he has already undertaken remastering (or other work) using those recordings. However, whilst the contract terms with WB run, he would be unable to do anything with them in the public domain.

Consequenly, if as is surmised, he lodges notice in accordance with the 35 year rule and rights to use of the recordings revert back to him from 2013 onwards, it is possible that he could release a new version of 'For You' in 2013.

However, what that version might be like or include is speculation. Whatever people's personal hopes, common sense warns against expectation.

langebleu said:

This is the most useful post in the history of the Internet.
Or at least with this god forsaken forum.

Of course, by the time Prince gets his masters back, the music industry will
probably have collapsed and there would be no money or point in releasing
remasters anymore. Music will only be available in lossy mp3 from the
celestial jukebox, and the whole concept of 'remasters' will have become
redundant, and "get on the boat" will become "missed the boat".

BorisFishpaw said:

Do you feel software players will be sophisticated enough to compensate for the lossy sound of mp3?

I know it's sort of cheating, but I'm not concerned how something sounds good--just that it does sound good. I know now that the music 'enhancing' plugins for certain players don't come close to this yet--but I'm assuming it will change.

In my mind the medium is going to change. It was destined to. I assume that the sound quality issue is something that folks might be working on resolving?

I think the sound quality will improve over time (maybe even the format).
But I do think the day of 'physical' music formats are now numbered.

BorisFishpaw said:

Unfortunately true. On the plus side, folks are working on better compression codecs right now.

Imago said:

Always useful.

TwiliteKid said:

You're killing me. The CDs from the 1980s sound like garbage compared to the vinyl. There are actually nuances of the music missing from the CDs, no matter what the volume level is set at. Ripping the vinyl to a CD-R on even the cheapest equipment nets a better aural experience than the WB releases.

I agree that remasters have to be done correctly, though.

We will all be dead of the swine flu man...

squirrelgrease said:

I know I'm opening up a whole can of worms here and I've heard this before, but can someone explain why the Vynl recordings sound superior to the 80's CDs?


Also, if somebody can fill us in, is Prince gay?

squirrelgrease said:

Who was talking about vinyl? Of course there's a difference between the sound of the albums on CD vs. vinyl, though I defy you to actually point out music that's missing on the CD versions. Vinyl is unquestionable the superior format.

My point is that the orginial CD issues sound just fine given their inherent limiitations, and that remastering to today's standards would most likely result in an inferior product.

TwiliteKid said:

I disagree that vinyl is a superior format. Just as in vinyl playback, lossless digital music can be extremely satisfying if using the right equipment. In most cases this involves at the very least, a good D/A converter.

The album Around The World In A Day comes to mind when I speak of missing music in a vinyl to CD comparison. It's not something that I can describe in words beyond subtle nuances that have to be heard in order to appreciate.

I don't know what else to tell you. It's just my opinion at this point.