hhhhdmt said:

harveya said:

They did, kind of, invent the pop boy band. And they invented pop music.

Prince just took every type of music and swept into a little pile, pulled out random bits and made it work as a cohesive whole.

So comparable in a way, but The Beatles were bigger than Jesus. Come on, you can't top that

btw. Paul McCartney? As one of the richest people in the world, do you really need to be allowing your music to be used on adverts and to be sold on iTunes? Times, surely, aren't hard for you!!

The beatles themelves acknowledged that they took alot of stuff from american musicians. People on prince's own fansite try to attack him but the fact is that everyone has their own influences. Prince wrote his own lyrics, came up with his own melodies so he doesnt need to apologize for anything, he's a genius. The beatles were a great band but their fans blow everything out of propotion and pretend as if the beatles had no influences, that they invented everything. They repeat garbage like " without the beatles, there would be no mj, no prince" etc etc which is complete nonsense

No one's attacking Prince here, and I don't see any suggestion that he has anything to apologize for. That said, there's still no question that the Beatles' influence and innovations trump Prince's. Again, that's not an insult or an attack: It's just the way it is.

TwiliteKid said:

hhhhdmt said:

The beatles themelves acknowledged that they took alot of stuff from american musicians. People on prince's own fansite try to attack him but the fact is that everyone has their own influences. Prince wrote his own lyrics, came up with his own melodies so he doesnt need to apologize for anything, he's a genius. The beatles were a great band but their fans blow everything out of propotion and pretend as if the beatles had no influences, that they invented everything. They repeat garbage like " without the beatles, there would be no mj, no prince" etc etc which is complete nonsense

No one's attacking Prince here, and I don't see any suggestion that he has anything to apologize for. That said, there's still no question that the Beatles' influence and innovations trump Prince's. Again, that's not an insult or an attack: It's just the way it is.

i see plenty of people who attack prince on this site and accusing him of "stealing" when the man has written 99 percent of his music, plays most of his instruments and forms his own melodies. All i was saying was the beatles too had their influences, they didnt make everything from scratch like some of their fans often claim. Everyone has their influences. I dont mean to be rude towards you or anything but i have seen plenty of comments on this site(from other posters, not you) accusing prince of "stealing" when all he has done is have influences which everyone else does too.

[Edited 11/25/10 5:52am]

[Edited 11/25/10 6:04am]

hhhhdmt said:

NDRU said:

The Beatles stuff is pure gold. Not a single bad album, and very few bad songs.

[Edited 11/24/10 10:58am]

It would have been interesting to see if this would still be the case, had they remained a band for 30 years.

the best thing for a band or act it often to break up or have one of them die. Lord Knows Prince would be MUCH MUCH more important if he died in Late 87 ( just after the Black Album was released)

harveya said:

errant said:

how embarrassing for you

They did, kind of, invent the pop boy band. And they invented pop music.

i think the members of The Mills Brothers, The Ink Spots, The Ravens, The Orioles, The Dominoes, and The Clovers. Might beg to differ. (remember POP = is short for popular, but it is really a marketing word. But all thoes bands were male vocal groups some very young all before the fab 4... in fact there were many many others before the Beatles)

OnlyNDaUsa said:

hhhhdmt said:

It would have been interesting to see if this would still be the case, had they remained a band for 30 years.

the best thing for a band or act it often to break up or have one of them die. Lord Knows Prince would be MUCH MUCH more important if he died in Late 87 ( just after the Black Album was released)

Man, I've been waiting for him to die for years now! No more bad albums to soil his legacy, and the Vault finally open.

And maybe we'd get an posthumous album with Michael Jackson's face hidden on the cover.

And oh yeah: Prince can't hold a candle to the Beatles. If only for the fact they proved you don't have to be an egotistic alienated asshole to make good music.

i doubt the vault has that many amazing tracks. Sure there's probably some good stuff hidden in there but alot of it may well be failed experiments. I honestly think wishing death on someone is flat out wrong. He's controlling about his music, he isnt charles manson or anything. I hope he lives a long and healthy life.

hhhhdmt said:

i see plenty of people who attack prince on this site and accusing him of "stealing" when the man has written 99 percent of his music, plays most of his instruments and forms his own melodies. All i was saying was the beatles too had their influences, they didnt make everything from scratch like some of their fans often claim. Everyone has their influences. I dont mean to be rude towards you or anything but i have seen plenty of comments on this site(from other posters, not you) accusing prince of "stealing" when all he has done is have influences which everyone else does too.

that is because he damn sure did steal some songs. He did not give proper credit for "Baby", "Soft and Wet", "my love is forever", "do me baby", "Party up", "U got the Look", "Cindy C", "kiss" all have issues with lack of proper credit.

Argument devolving into race in 3,2,1.....

NouveauDance said:

Argument devolving into race in 3,2,1.....

'race' is a good song but it is no 'love me do'

OnlyNDaUsa said:

hhhhdmt said:

i see plenty of people who attack prince on this site and accusing him of "stealing" when the man has written 99 percent of his music, plays most of his instruments and forms his own melodies. All i was saying was the beatles too had their influences, they didnt make everything from scratch like some of their fans often claim. Everyone has their influences. I dont mean to be rude towards you or anything but i have seen plenty of comments on this site(from other posters, not you) accusing prince of "stealing" when all he has done is have influences which everyone else does too.

that is because he damn sure did steal some songs. He did not give proper credit for "Baby", "Soft and Wet", "my love is forever", "do me baby", "Party up", "U got the Look", "Cindy C", "kiss" all have issues with lack of proper credit.

he wrote kiss as far as i know and then he took it back after the band made a few changes to it. I honestly didnt know about cindy c.

Pentacle said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

the best thing for a band or act it often to break up or have one of them die. Lord Knows Prince would be MUCH MUCH more important if he died in Late 87 ( just after the Black Album was released)

Man, I've been waiting for him to die for years now! No more bad albums to soil his legacy, and the Vault finally open.

And maybe we'd get an posthumous album with Michael Jackson's face hidden on the cover.

And oh yeah: Prince can't hold a candle to the Beatles. If only for the fact they proved you don't have to be an egotistic alienated asshole to make good music.

John Lennon's antics did not help him. In fact I saw part of a story on him last night. Nixon was looking for a way to have him kicked out. I guess they did not like his political point of view (humm) and wanted him to not be an influence. Now I was not old enough to understand all that at the time. And I can see even now how some of it was a bit "oh wow!" but not to the point when he was a threat. He was just playing the part of the whacked out hippy. It fit in well with band.

Ironically if he would have been kicked out he might still be with us.

hhhhdmt said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

that is because he damn sure did steal some songs. He did not give proper credit for "Baby", "Soft and Wet", "my love is forever", "do me baby", "Party up", "U got the Look", "Cindy C", "kiss" all have issues with lack of proper credit.

he wrote kiss as far as i know and then he took it back after the band made a few changes to it. I honestly didnt know about cindy c.

in Cindy c. the RAP is a song called "music is the key" *simular to Shelia's rap in "it's gonna be a beautiful night"

OnlyNDaUsa said:

hhhhdmt said:

he wrote kiss as far as i know and then he took it back after the band made a few changes to it. I honestly didnt know about cindy c.

in Cindy c. the RAP is a song called "music is the key" *simular to Shelia's rap in "it's gonna be a beautiful night"

lets not forget about the fact that he gave so many songs to different artists where he did not ask for credit

Anyway my point was that prince is attacked for having influences like Brown, Hendrix, Santana etc. Whereas the fact is that all artists have influences.

hhhhdmt said:

lets not forget about the fact that he gave so many songs to different artists where he did not ask for credit

he may have put their name on the record lable but Prince gets the checks.

Anyway my point was that prince is attacked for having influences like Brown, Hendrix, Santana etc. Whereas the fact is that all artists have influences.

who attacked him for that?

OnlyNDaUsa said:

hhhhdmt said:

lets not forget about the fact that he gave so many songs to different artists where he did not ask for credit

he may have put their name on the record lable but Prince gets the checks.

Anyway my point was that prince is attacked for having influences like Brown, Hendrix, Santana etc. Whereas the fact is that all artists have influences.

who attacked him for that?

i've seen plenty of comments (especially in the non music section) that since prince is influenced by so and so musician, he stole from them

hhhhdmt said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

i've seen plenty of comments (especially in the non music section) that since prince is influenced by so and so musician, he stole from them

'stolen' might be a harsh word but yeah prince did take from many acts to form his own style. I am not sure that is an attack or just a fact.

I am also pretty sure that much of that is people just showing off their knowledge of different musical acts.

With the Revolution , with the sophistication of Parade and the overall well rounded artistic direction they were going in I think he would have rivaled them. Sometimes it Snows in April, and just about everything on Parade pointed to limitless possibilities and diversity to his music. But after 88 he couldn't even rival Teddy Riley or Bell Biv Devoe. He became a joke. He really hurt his image and legacy in the 90's and beyond.

Instead of being well rounded serious artists like the Beatles, He in someways will forever be an 80's legacy act. The Beatles are timeless.

funkyhead said:

...does his back catalogue / legacy pale into insignificance when compared to theirs?.

1. happy thanksgiving

2. log off

V10LETBLUES said:

With the Revolution , with the sophistication of Parade and the overall well rounded artistic direction they were going in I think he would have rivaled them. Sometimes it Snows in April, and just about everything on Parade pointed to limitless possibilities and diversity to his music. But after 88 he couldn't even rival Teddy Riley or Bell Biv Devoe. He became a joke. He really hurt his image and legacy in the 90's and beyond.

Instead of being well rounded serious artists like the Beatles, He in someways will forever be an 80's legacy act. The Beatles are timeless.

He is a well rounded and "serious" artist. His legacy is secure, he will go down in history as one of the greatest musicians ever and is widely accepted as so by most music critics. His 80's work alone is enough for him to be one of the greats. People still listen to purple rain, 1999, sign o the times etc. Just because his later output was inconsistent doesnt take away from his 80s work. And there are still plenty of gems found on his later work. His stock will only rise higher as time goes by. Infact his stock has risen a great deal over the past six years

[Edited 11/25/10 8:22am]

[Edited 11/25/10 8:29am]

V10LETBLUES said:

But after 88 he couldn't even rival Teddy Riley or Bell Biv Devoe.

damn

or should it be

Pentacle said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

the best thing for a band or act it often to break up or have one of them die. Lord Knows Prince would be MUCH MUCH more important if he died in Late 87 ( just after the Black Album was released)

Man, I've been waiting for him to die for years now!

Thats a pretty horrible thing to say...

lezama said:

Pentacle said:

Man, I've been waiting for him to die for years now!

Thats a pretty horrible thing to say...

yeah but it is true if he would have died in 87 or 88 he would be much more important.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

lezama said:

Thats a pretty horrible thing to say...

yeah but it is true if he would have died in 87 or 88 he would be much more important.

doesnt matter. Contrary to what some people say on this site, he's widely regarded as a genius by most music critics and rightly so. And he has plenty of good songs post 88, it just happened to be that he was more inconsistent afterwards.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

lezama said:

Thats a pretty horrible thing to say...

yeah but it is true if he would have died in 87 or 88 he would be much more important.

You're a dumbass. Not only in P&R but now its official..in this forum too.

hhhhdmt said:

NDRU said:

The Beatles stuff is pure gold. Not a single bad album, and very few bad songs.

[Edited 11/24/10 10:58am]

It would have been interesting to see if this would still be the case, had they remained a band for 30 years.

Often wondered myself. I think looking at the early solo stuff of Lennon, McCartney and Harrison they had maybe two more great Beatles albums in them, then it would just be treading water for several decades. McCartney's solo stuff waivers up and down in quality but he's never written another Hey Jude or another Long & Winding Road. Harrison piled all his good songs onto All Things Must Pass and then nothing much of any quality (proving once and for all that he was a step behind the other 2).

Lennon did a couple of great albums but he went so far up his own arse I'm surprised Yoko didnt put a missing persons alert out.

They would still have been greater than the Stones, but as solo artists none of them challanged music like Prince.

xlr8r said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

yeah but it is true if he would have died in 87 or 88 he would be much more important.

You're a dumbass. Not only in P&R but now its official..in this forum too.

so you think he has IMPROVED his image since 87-88? (oh and the rules apply here as well, not that i care to report you but you know, flames are typical not viewed in a positive light. as far as i care that can stay. I stand by what I said.)

OnlyNDaUsa said:

xlr8r said:

You're a dumbass. Not only in P&R but now its official..in this forum too.

so you think he has IMPROVED his image since 87-88? (oh and the rules apply here as well, not that i care to report you but you know, flames are typical not viewed in a positive light. as far as i care that can stay. I stand by what I said.)

They can ban me all they want. It needed to be said.

hhhhdmt said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

yeah but it is true if he would have died in 87 or 88 he would be much more important.

doesnt matter. Contrary to what some people say on this site, he's widely regarded as a genius by most music critics and rightly so. And he has plenty of good songs post 88, it just happened to be that he was more inconsistent afterwards.

which is the best time to STOP! I guess he did not have to die per-say but just slow down the flow of music. WB was correct he was putting out too much music. *even PRINCE said he was not happy with Parade

xlr8r said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

so you think he has IMPROVED his image since 87-88? (oh and the rules apply here as well, not that i care to report you but you know, flames are typical not viewed in a positive light. as far as i care that can stay. I stand by what I said.)

They can ban me all they want. It needed to be said.

say what you like baby cakes! but do you think that he had improved his over all image or hurt his over all image since the late 80s? (HINT: look at the songs he dose in concert, how many are from the 80s? or 90s or 00s)

OnlyNDaUsa said:

hhhhdmt said:

doesnt matter. Contrary to what some people say on this site, he's widely regarded as a genius by most music critics and rightly so. And he has plenty of good songs post 88, it just happened to be that he was more inconsistent afterwards.

which is the best time to STOP! I guess he did not have to die per-say but just slow down the flow of music. WB was correct he was putting out too much music. *even PRINCE said he was not happy with Parade

no its doesnt mean you have to stop. He still had enough good material in the 90s to come up with atleast six or 7 good/great and yes consistent albums but released too much stuff. That doesnt mean that there arent amazing songs from that period because there are. Without a doubt, his lack of quality control has effected him but it still doesnt take away from his brilliance imo.

As far as parade, most prince fans are satisfied with it. Most critics are too.