Soundcheck just announced that tomorrow (Tuesday, April 26) they will talk about Prince's statement on cover songs.

Soundcheck is a daily music talk radio show produced by WNYC in New York. It's on at 2 pm & 10 pm in New York, FM 93.9. The show is 1 hour long & usually has 3 or 4 segments, so expect up to 20 minutes of discussion about covers, although it could be as short as, say, 10 minutes.

The show's name is similar to Sound Opinions, which is another public radio show in the U.S., so you should check which one your local station airs.

For those outside the U.S. or in areas in country that don't get the show, after it airs at 2 pm, it should be posted here:

http://www.wnyc.org/shows/soundcheck/

[Edited 4/25/11 12:53pm]

I already know his stance:

It' okay if HE covers other people's songs, (especially if he changes the lyrics) but if someone covers one of his songs he chhews their ass, (especially if they change the lyrics).

He's like a goose - he wakes up in a new world every day.

Not exactly: he wants to be asked and allowed to yea or nay said request.

as cynical as I am against prince for being such a stickler on this issue I agree that people should have to get permission to cover a song for publication (live is another issue).

Also I am pretty sure the soundcheck is going to discuss the ISSUE not Prince's opinion on it.

It's funny, I don't think other great songwriters have complained about people covering their songs. John Lennon used to complain to Yoko that not enough people covered his songs compared to Paul's. Coming from someone who has written so many songs about how awesome he is, Prince's comments seem to reflect a surprisingly low self esteem when it comes to his songwriting.

Frankly, I've heard enough about it from him.

Shit or get off the pot Prince.

You've got an issue. It's going to take more than singing about it in some of your songs and giving a less-than-15 minute interview on some late night talk show(s) to affect change.

You challenge us to "do the work"...get to it.

I don't know what it would take to make the changes he wants and have no desire to, but if this is something he feels strongly about, quit whining, ad nauseum for the past several years, AND DO SOMETHING.

The first thing being actually outlining exactly what your beef is.

Clarify WHY it's okay to be unhappy with covers, when you obviously sing covers yourself.

ETC...

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Not exactly: he wants to be asked and allowed to yea or nay said request.

as cynical as I am against prince for being such a stickler on this issue I agree that people should have to get permission to cover a song for publication (live is another issue).

Also I am pretty sure the soundcheck is going to discuss the ISSUE not Prince's opinion on it.

It is a weird rule, and Prince might actually be right on the merits. But I don't understand why he is so defensive about it now, when he used to intentionally give away some of his best material and not even take credit for it.

I wonder if Prince really bothered getting permission in writing from the authors of the songs he covered on albums...

I'm sure he thinks anyone would consider an honour having Prince cover one of their songs so IN HIS PARTICULAR CASE I think he doesn't worry asking before.

steakfinger said:

I already know his stance:

It' okay if HE covers other people's songs, (especially if he changes the lyrics) but if someone covers one of his songs he chhews their ass, (especially if they change the lyrics).

He's like a goose - he wakes up in a new world every day.

it's amazing how often he embarrasses himself and gets away with it

The thing is that, to the extent that the rule favors anyone, it is new musicians who are just starting out and haven't perfected their songwriting chops. Why would Prince want to make a crusade out of attacking a rule that benefits new musicians? Just because he was able to write new material from the get-go doesn't mean every artist can. Look at the first couple of LPs by the Beatles and Stones, for example. If they had to get permission for every cover then those albums might not have been released.

[Edited 4/25/11 13:22pm]

electricberet said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Not exactly: he wants to be asked and allowed to yea or nay said request.

as cynical as I am against prince for being such a stickler on this issue I agree that people should have to get permission to cover a song for publication (live is another issue).

Also I am pretty sure the soundcheck is going to discuss the ISSUE not Prince's opinion on it.

It is a weird rule, and Prince might actually be right on the merits. But I don't understand why he is so defensive about it now, when he used to intentionally give away some of his best material and not even take credit for it.

Here is an article going back to 2004 where he gripes about it.

http://findarticles.com/p..._n6183858/

and I agree with you, he has a point (as he does with the video sites) but it seems counter productive to his success. He OWES 'nothing compares 2 U' Sinead O'Connor. Prince may have written it but she made it a hit.

Nothinbutjoy said:

Frankly, I've heard enough about it from him.

Shit or get off the pot Prince.

You've got an issue. It's going to take more than singing about it in some of your songs and giving a less-than-15 minute interview on some late night talk show(s) to affect change.

You challenge us to "do the work"...get to it.

I don't know what it would take to make the changes he wants and have no desire to, but if this is something he feels strongly about, quit whining, ad nauseum for the past several years, AND DO SOMETHING.

If he wanted to do something about it, he could get involved in the political process and try to lobby his representatives in Congress to change the copyright laws so that they reflect his position. He is a prominent enough entertainer that politicians would probably return his phone calls. But that would probably go against his religious beliefs. So instead he whines about it enough to embarrass himself, but not enough to accomplish anything.

electricberet said:

Nothinbutjoy said:

Frankly, I've heard enough about it from him.

Shit or get off the pot Prince.

You've got an issue. It's going to take more than singing about it in some of your songs and giving a less-than-15 minute interview on some late night talk show(s) to affect change.

You challenge us to "do the work"...get to it.

I don't know what it would take to make the changes he wants and have no desire to, but if this is something he feels strongly about, quit whining, ad nauseum for the past several years, AND DO SOMETHING.

If he wanted to do something about it, he could get involved in the political process and try to lobby his representatives in Congress to change the copyright laws so that they reflect his position. He is a prominent enough entertainer that politicians would probably return his phone calls. But that would probably go against his religious beliefs. So instead he whines about it enough to embarrass himself, but not enough to accomplish anything.

Agreed...when Parental Advisory labels hit the scene that's what musicians did, very articulately.

Another point to make is that this isn't an issue where people can defend Prince by saying that he can do or say what he wants and it's nobody else's business. He's publicly taking a position that could potentially affect a lot of other artists for better or for worse. And this coming from a person who proudly admitted that he didn't vote in the last presidential election.

He did a cover as the lead track from his last widely commercially released album (Crimson & Clover) so his stance is pretty hypocritical.

This is just about Prince's usual BS - control and money. Something obviously put a bee in his bonnet and rather than dealing with, he does an interview where he makes some out of context bratish comment. If he was inspired by anything enough to make even a half decent album and promote it, he'd be concentrating on that rather than bitching about nickel and dime stuff. It's no different to past crusades, they're a distraction from his current artistic void.

Dont care what anyone says, NO artist likes or really wants another artist to cover their song, exspecially if that song is looked upon as a classic, im sure the Stylistics & Delfonics didnt want Prince covering their songs, but he did anyway. Other artist will cover Prince songs (most of which will sound distasteful 2 my ears)

But i cant disagree with P, nobody wants someone stomping on there masterpeice, 2 make a few dollars. Why cant artist create their on "classics" these days???

It kinda sucks when other ppl win awards for songs you wrote and sung. Plus I do agree Prince sounds better on a majority of his songs that other ppl cover. I have arguements with others who think it's Chaka's song or Alicia Key's song. That could suck sometimes. And think about these no name artists who just come out of nowhere fuck up a Prince cover and then say... oh its mine. Or the samplers. There are a lot of artist out there who sample from Prince's songs yet don't give him any credit at all. That can be very frustrating. Yes he can sue the hell out of them but that costs money over time.

NouveauDance said:

He did a cover as the lead track from his last widely commercially released album (Crimson & Clover) so his stance is pretty hypocritical.

This is just about Prince's usual BS - control and money. Something obviously put a bee in his bonnet and rather than dealing with, he does an interview where he makes some out of context bratish comment. If he was inspired by anything enough to make even a half decent album and promote it, he'd be concentrating on that rather than bitching about nickel and dime stuff. It's no different to past crusades, they're a distraction from his current artistic void.

I'm sure he got permission or we'd hear about that lawsuit.

Prince is a simpleton.

ItsGonnaBLonely said:

Dont care what anyone says, NO artist likes or really wants another artist to cover their song, exspecially if that song is looked upon as a classic, im sure the Stylistics & Delfonics didnt want Prince covering their songs, but he did anyway. Other artist will cover Prince songs (most of which will sound distasteful 2 my ears)

But i cant disagree with P, nobody wants someone stomping on there masterpeice, 2 make a few dollars. Why cant artist create their on "classics" these days???

That's nonsense. George Harrison loved some of the cover versions of "Something," especially the one by James Brown. He even changed one of the lyrics to match the way Frank Sinatra covered it.

Now, I agree with Prince that it would be polite, at the least, for an artist to ask for permission before covering someone else's song. But if that's how he feels, there are more effective ways of handling it. If this is based on a specific incident, he could privately contact the offender in question and let that person know that he wasn't happy with the cover version and would appreciate being asked permission next time. If this is happening all the time, and he really wants to stop it, it would be classier to have someone else do the public complaining and then use his own influence to address the problem through back channels. This is about as classy as Prince Charles making insulting remarks about modern British architecture. If you're royalty, pop or otherwise, let someone else do your dirty work.

electricberet said:

ItsGonnaBLonely said:

Dont care what anyone says, NO artist likes or really wants another artist to cover their song, exspecially if that song is looked upon as a classic, im sure the Stylistics & Delfonics didnt want Prince covering their songs, but he did anyway. Other artist will cover Prince songs (most of which will sound distasteful 2 my ears)

But i cant disagree with P, nobody wants someone stomping on there masterpeice, 2 make a few dollars. Why cant artist create their on "classics" these days???

That's nonsense. George Harrison loved some of the cover versions of "Something," especially the one by James Brown. He even changed one of the lyrics to match the way Frank Sinatra covered it.

Now, I agree with Prince that it would be polite, at the least, for an artist to ask for permission before covering someone else's song. But if that's how he feels, there are more effective ways of handling it. If this is based on a specific incident, he could privately contact the offender in question and let that person know that he wasn't happy with the cover version and would appreciate being asked permission next time. If this is happening all the time, and he really wants to stop it, it would be classier to have someone else do the public complaining and then use his own influence to address the problem through back channels. This is about as classy as Prince Charles making insulting remarks about modern British architecture. If you're royalty, pop or otherwise, let someone else do your dirty work.

If he's talking about live covers, I'd have to agree with Prince partially. Trey Songz(And I actually like his voice) completely fucked up Purple Rain at the BET Honors. I was so pissed. Didin't listen to him for at least a month

lPoeticl said:

NouveauDance said:

He did a cover as the lead track from his last widely commercially released album (Crimson & Clover) so his stance is pretty hypocritical.

This is just about Prince's usual BS - control and money. Something obviously put a bee in his bonnet and rather than dealing with, he does an interview where he makes some out of context bratish comment. If he was inspired by anything enough to make even a half decent album and promote it, he'd be concentrating on that rather than bitching about nickel and dime stuff. It's no different to past crusades, they're a distraction from his current artistic void.

I'm sure he got permission or we'd hear about that lawsuit.

If he's gotten permission every time he's covered another artist's song, why doesn't he mention that when he discusses the issue? It would strengthen his case if he practices what he preaches. Oh, wait--maybe he wants everyone to think that he's never done a cover version, to enhance his mystique.

electricberet said:

ItsGonnaBLonely said:

Dont care what anyone says, NO artist likes or really wants another artist to cover their song, exspecially if that song is looked upon as a classic, im sure the Stylistics & Delfonics didnt want Prince covering their songs, but he did anyway. Other artist will cover Prince songs (most of which will sound distasteful 2 my ears)

But i cant disagree with P, nobody wants someone stomping on there masterpeice, 2 make a few dollars. Why cant artist create their on "classics" these days???

That's nonsense. George Harrison loved some of the cover versions of "Something," especially the one by James Brown. He even changed one of the lyrics to match the way Frank Sinatra covered it.

Now, I agree with Prince that it would be polite, at the least, for an artist to ask for permission before covering someone else's song. But if that's how he feels, there are more effective ways of handling it. If this is based on a specific incident, he could privately contact the offender in question and let that person know that he wasn't happy with the cover version and would appreciate being asked permission next time. If this is happening all the time, and he really wants to stop it, it would be classier to have someone else do the public complaining and then use his own influence to address the problem through back channels. This is about as classy as Prince Charles making insulting remarks about modern British architecture. If you're royalty, pop or otherwise, let someone else do your dirty work.

Not really, after hearing the cover, he may have taking a liking to it, are appreciated the work, Frank Sinatra put in to it, but to say he WANTED Frank to cover his song? .... come on now thats ridiculous. and to be fair James Brown and Frank Sinatra were top billing acts for a reason, their great talents were beyond extention of todays artist talents. I dont wanna hear any of the artist of today (even the few good ones) covering Prince songs. I cant take another Darling Nikki cover im sorry.

But you argue a good point, yes P could have went a different route, but he chose words, instead of lawyers and putting more stress and money (we kno how that goes wit P) into a loosing battle

electricberet said:

lPoeticl said:

I'm sure he got permission or we'd hear about that lawsuit.

If he's gotten permission every time he's covered another artist's song, why doesn't he mention that when he discusses the issue? It would strengthen his case if he practices what he preaches. Oh, wait--maybe he wants everyone to think that he's never done a cover version, to enhance his mystique.

I don't know. I'm not his spokesperson. I'm just saying that there would be a lawsuit or something said about it.

And everyone knows he's done a cover or two. Obviously he's not happy about ppl covering his songs without his permission, I don't think he'd go and put someone's song on his CD and call it his own. All of the covers he's done on his albums, he's given credit to the writer and the artist who originally sung it.

ItsGonnaBLonely said:

electricberet said:

That's nonsense. George Harrison loved some of the cover versions of "Something," especially the one by James Brown. He even changed one of the lyrics to match the way Frank Sinatra covered it.

Now, I agree with Prince that it would be polite, at the least, for an artist to ask for permission before covering someone else's song. But if that's how he feels, there are more effective ways of handling it. If this is based on a specific incident, he could privately contact the offender in question and let that person know that he wasn't happy with the cover version and would appreciate being asked permission next time. If this is happening all the time, and he really wants to stop it, it would be classier to have someone else do the public complaining and then use his own influence to address the problem through back channels. This is about as classy as Prince Charles making insulting remarks about modern British architecture. If you're royalty, pop or otherwise, let someone else do your dirty work.

Not really, after hearing the cover, he may have taking a liking to it, are appreciated the work, Frank Sinatra put in to it, but to say he WANTED Frank to cover his song? .... come on now thats ridiculous. and to be fair James Brown and Frank Sinatra were top billing acts for a reason, their great talents were beyond extention of todays artist talents. I dont wanna hear any of the artist of today (even the few good ones) covering Prince songs. I cant take another Darling Nikki cover im sorry.

But you argue a good point, yes P could have went a different route, but he chose words, instead of lawyers and putting more stress and money (we kno how that goes wit P) into a loosing battle

agreed.

prince is just attention-seeking, same as that stupid chemtrails interview. he just bitches for the sake of it, last week it was the internet, this week it's covers, he's intoxicated on his own ego. what a prat his royal badness has become!!!!

lPoeticl said:

And everyone knows he's done a cover or two. Obviously he's not happy about ppl covering his songs without his permission, I don't think he'd go and put someone's song on his CD and call it his own. All of the covers he's done on his albums, he's given credit to the writer and the artist who originally sung it.

I learnt that Crimson & Clover was a cover in this thread.

I've checked the album - nothing about who wrote it anywhere.

Maybe it's part of the entire galactic experience, which I can visit at lotusflow3r.com...

If this genuinely means so much to him, he'd better get his stance and principles straight and stick to them. Otherwise, I'd have to go with NouveauDance on this one - smoke and mirrors (at best).

Chiquetet said:

lPoeticl said:

And everyone knows he's done a cover or two. Obviously he's not happy about ppl covering his songs without his permission, I don't think he'd go and put someone's song on his CD and call it his own. All of the covers he's done on his albums, he's given credit to the writer and the artist who originally sung it.

I learnt that Crimson & Clover was a cover in this thread.

I've checked the album - nothing about who wrote it anywhere.

Maybe it's part of the entire galactic experience, which I can visit at lotusflow3r.com...

If this genuinely means so much to him, he'd better get his stance and principles straight and stick to them. Otherwise, I'd have to go with NouveauDance on this one - smoke and mirrors (at best).

you cannot make such a generalisation that all songwriters dont want their songs covered. Plenty of songwriters would be flattered if someone covered their song/s. If you cover someone's songs without permission, i dont see the point of complaining when someone does the same to your songs. Plain and simple

thedance said:

Chiquetet said:

I learnt that Crimson & Clover was a cover in this thread.

I've checked the album - nothing about who wrote it anywhere.

Maybe it's part of the entire galactic experience, which I can visit at lotusflow3r.com...

If this genuinely means so much to him, he'd better get his stance and principles straight and stick to them. Otherwise, I'd have to go with NouveauDance on this one - smoke and mirrors (at best).

This story gets even odder. When I look on the ASCAP website, it lists "Crimson and Clover" as being written by Prince and credited to Controversy Music. Which part of the song did he write? Or did he write a different song with the same title?

On the other hand, when I look up the song on BMI, it says it was written by Tommy James and Peter Lucia. Peter Lucia was the drummer for the Shondells, and he died in 1987. I wonder how Prince got his permission to cover the song. He must have asked him 22 years before he released his cover version. Or maybe he conducted a seance.