It seemed to me that WB never really backed Prince's label at all. Who sold the most records [outside of Prince of course]? Any real top 10 hits? How come none of the artist really got any push? I've aways felt that WB purposely didn't push any of his artist on that label.....

Paisley was a vanity label, Prince ruined it by releasing records, then ignoring them, causing them to sink like a stone.

Shame too, because there was some great music released that deserved to be given proper promotion.

TheDigitalGardener said:

Paisley was a vanity label, Prince ruined it by releasing records, then ignoring them, causing them to sink like a stone.

Shame too, because there was some great music released that deserved to be given proper promotion.

So, are you saying he just did it to have it? What was the point of having it then?

gunner82 said:

It seemed to me that WB never really backed Prince's label at all. Who sold the most records [outside of Prince of course]? Any real top 10 hits? How come none of the artist really got any push? I've aways felt that WB purposely didn't push any of his artist on that label.....

WB was behind it plenty. It was Prince that never really backed it. I mean, seriously, who were WB going to back from the stable of artists Prince had signed? He signed up his girlfriends and hangers-on to put out records with varying degrees of his input after he snookered WB into establishing PP Records based on the track record they had had with albums like those by the Time and Sheila E. prior to the existence of Paisley Park. The success of his side projects was immediately diminished post-PR superstardom when all of them were moved completely under his control to finance and promote. WB gave him a vanity gift and he squandered it. Don't think for a minute that WB wouldn't have loved to bear the brunt of promoting and nurturing already proven acts like Sheila E. and the Time, who they'd already made a decent amount of money off of before they gave them up to Prince's control.

Paisley Park (the record label) was merely an outlet for Prince's own music funneled through his friends and girlfriends.

It would have been really great if Prince had discovered or managed that next "big thing" without molding them in his image or putting their voices over his music. But in that vein, imagine if Prince had signed Terence Trent D'arby or Lenny Kravitz?

Look at Madonna . . . WB gave her a record label too (Maverick) and she had diverse acts like Prodigy, Alanis Morissette, and the Deftones.

Looking back, we were all lemmings to buy any-and-everything with the Paisley Park logo on it.

Wow! Thank all of you for telling me this. I honestly never knew any of this about Paisley Park...I really thought Prince was trying to establish a real label & he got played by WB. Then where did Prince & WB truly collapse?

gunner82 said:

Wow! Thank all of you for telling me this. I honestly never knew any of this about Paisley Park...I really thought Prince was trying to establish a real label & he got played by WB. Then where did Prince & WB truly collapse?

On google! Go see what happened!

gunner82 said:

Wow! Thank all of you for telling me this. I honestly never knew any of this about Paisley Park...I really thought Prince was trying to establish a real label & he got played by WB. Then where did Prince & WB truly collapse?

Um, how long have you been a fan??

gunner82 said:

TheDigitalGardener said:

Paisley was a vanity label, Prince ruined it by releasing records, then ignoring them, causing them to sink like a stone.

Shame too, because there was some great music released that deserved to be given proper promotion.

So, are you saying he just did it to have it? What was the point of having it then?

the way I heard it was warner wouldnt let him promote the artist there

Se7en said:

Paisley Park (the record label) was merely an outlet for Prince's own music funneled through his friends and girlfriends.

It would have been really great if Prince had discovered or managed that next "big thing" without molding them in his image or putting their voices over his music. But in that vein, imagine if Prince had signed Terence Trent D'arby or Lenny Kravitz?

Look at Madonna . . . WB gave her a record label too (Maverick) and she had diverse acts like Prodigy, Alanis Morissette, and the Deftones.

Looking back, we were all lemmings to buy any-and-everything with the Paisley Park logo on it.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

I cherish all my Paisley albums minus Tony Le Mans, Good Question and a couple of others.

Paisley Park was a vanity label given to Prince by WB. As for the top selling artists outside of Prince, that would be Sheila E and the Time.

so much that came out on the label was bad!

alexnvrmnd777 said:

gunner82 said:

Wow! Thank all of you for telling me this. I honestly never knew any of this about Paisley Park...I really thought Prince was trying to establish a real label & he got played by WB. Then where did Prince & WB truly collapse?

Um, how long have you been a fan??

For a long time. But I really was never interested in the whole "Paisley Park" or "Slave" info until recently. I always thought I knew enough about the "Slave", but apparently I don't....

Spinlight said:

gunner82 said:

Wow! Thank all of you for telling me this. I honestly never knew any of this about Paisley Park...I really thought Prince was trying to establish a real label & he got played by WB. Then where did Prince & WB truly collapse?

On google! Go see what happened!

Will do!

alexnvrmnd777 said:

gunner82 said:

Wow! Thank all of you for telling me this. I honestly never knew any of this about Paisley Park...I really thought Prince was trying to establish a real label & he got played by WB. Then where did Prince & WB truly collapse?

Um, how long have you been a fan??

This question repeatedly comes up in the org, and I for one would like to read some justification for why it does. The question is obviously meant to make another person here feel embarrassed, ashamed, demoralized, and as if they don't belong.

Is that necessary? Why be mean-spirited? Do the people (and there are several) on here who ask this sort of question feel empowered by doing so?

I could be wrong, but the primary reason for asking this sort of question or (saying something of this kind directly) seems to be to assert one's own authoritativeness and expertise. Is THAT necessary? Really. I mean, come on. It doesn't take long on here to recognize who knows what and how much they know about what.

I find these sorts of questions (and direct assertions in this vein) incredibly childish, petty, and lacking in generosity.

Paisley Park was not a vanity label. If it had been Warner never would have put so much money into building an office park with state-of-the-art studios and a soundstage. The real problem was that Prince treated it like a vanity label instead of hiring serious people to run it.

strmn said:

alexnvrmnd777 said:

Um, how long have you been a fan??

This question repeatedly comes up in the org, and I for one would like to read some justification for why it does. The question is obviously meant to make another person here feel embarrassed, ashamed, demoralized, and as if they don't belong.

Is that necessary? Why be mean-spirited? Do the people (and there are several) on here who ask this sort of question feel empowered by doing so?

I could be wrong, but the primary reason for asking this sort of question or (saying something of this kind directly) seems to be to assert one's own authoritativeness and expertise. Is THAT necessary? Really. I mean, come on. It doesn't take long on here to recognize who knows what and how much they know about what.

I find these sorts of questions (and direct assertions in this vein) incredibly childish, petty, and lacking in generosity.

Honestly, I didn't even take it that way. I used to think I knew quite a lot about Prince until coming to this forum, & I've learned a great deal from virtually everybody thus far. Sarcasm is what it is...I just don't think a casual fan would go out of their way to even register to this site. So, it came off as irrelevant to me...

gunner82 said:

strmn said:

This question repeatedly comes up in the org, and I for one would like to read some justification for why it does. The question is obviously meant to make another person here feel embarrassed, ashamed, demoralized, and as if they don't belong.

Is that necessary? Why be mean-spirited? Do the people (and there are several) on here who ask this sort of question feel empowered by doing so?

I could be wrong, but the primary reason for asking this sort of question or (saying something of this kind directly) seems to be to assert one's own authoritativeness and expertise. Is THAT necessary? Really. I mean, come on. It doesn't take long on here to recognize who knows what and how much they know about what.

I find these sorts of questions (and direct assertions in this vein) incredibly childish, petty, and lacking in generosity.

Honestly, I didn't even take it that way. I used to think I knew quite a lot about Prince until coming to this forum, & I've learned a great deal from virtually everybody thus far. Sarcasm is what it is...I just don't think a casual fan would go out of their way to even register to this site. So, it came off as irrelevant to me...

Thank you. It was just a fuckin' question, strmn. It was more of a surprise deal for me because I "assumed" (you know what that means, lol), based on some of your other posts, that you were well-versed in something like the Paisley era. Nothing malicious. At least not yet.

alexnvrmnd777 said:

gunner82 said:

Honestly, I didn't even take it that way. I used to think I knew quite a lot about Prince until coming to this forum, & I've learned a great deal from virtually everybody thus far. Sarcasm is what it is...I just don't think a casual fan would go out of their way to even register to this site. So, it came off as irrelevant to me...

Thank you. It was just a fuckin' question, strmn. It was more of a surprise deal for me because I "assumed" (you know what that means, lol), based on some of your other posts, that you were well-versed in something like the Paisley era. Nothing malicious. At least not yet.

Oh, now I see: Meanspiritedness and rudeness are part of your general character. That still doesn't provide me with a reason why others ask that sort of question, though it does suggest why this might be so.

I think probably one of the great lost opportunities on PPR was The Family. They deserved more than what they did, which was an album and one gig? Then.....nothing.

Great album, and those guys could play too. Such a pity.

[Edited 5/14/11 13:31pm]

jpnyc said:

Paisley Park was not a vanity label. If it had been Warner never would have put so much money into building an office park with state-of-the-art studios and a soundstage. The real problem was that Prince treated it like a vanity label instead of hiring serious people to run it.

I don't think Warners put money into the facilities called Paisley Park. Wasn't that all Prince's investment? And it was rented by various projects back in the late 80's and early 90's. Including, if memory serves, "Grumpy Old Men", Sesame Street (or Muppets?) on Ice, and Fine Young Cannibals.

Warner's probably put money into Paisley Park Records for the album pressings/distribution after the point of recording. And maybe into fees for technicians and artists.

^^ REM used Paisley Park Studios too for mixing purposes.

IIRC, Prince used his Purple Rain earnings to build Paisley Park (the studio) on his own. I don't think that had any WB involvement. He wanted somewhere to be able to create 24/7.

You really have to specify which Paisley Park you're talking about . . . the song (great), the studio (legendary), or the record label (failure).

The label was horrible (as many have said), but let's not forget that Prince's own albums from ATWIAD thru The Hits were "co-released" by the Paisley Park label. I think the freedom of Paisley Park (the studio) allowed him to venture into new territories that he might not have gotten to -- or at least not as quickly -- if he was limited by the constraints of other studios.

strmn said:

alexnvrmnd777 said:

Thank you. It was just a fuckin' question, strmn. It was more of a surprise deal for me because I "assumed" (you know what that means, lol), based on some of your other posts, that you were well-versed in something like the Paisley era. Nothing malicious. At least not yet.

Oh, now I see: Meanspiritedness and rudeness are part of your general character. That still doesn't provide me with a reason why others ask that sort of question, though it does suggest why this might be so.

asking the question gives one context on how best to answer it.

errant said:

strmn said:

Oh, now I see: Meanspiritedness and rudeness are part of your general character. That still doesn't provide me with a reason why others ask that sort of question, though it does suggest why this might be so.

asking the question gives one context on how best to answer it.

I don't find this answer very convincing.

ufoclub said:

jpnyc said:

Paisley Park was not a vanity label. If it had been Warner never would have put so much money into building an office park with state-of-the-art studios and a soundstage. The real problem was that Prince treated it like a vanity label instead of hiring serious people to run it.

I don't think Warners put money into the facilities called Paisley Park. Wasn't that all Prince's investment? And it was rented by various projects back in the late 80's and early 90's. Including, if memory serves, "Grumpy Old Men", Sesame Street (or Muppets?) on Ice, and Fine Young Cannibals.

Warner's probably put money into Paisley Park Records for the album pressings/distribution after the point of recording. And maybe into fees for technicians and artists.

Didn't Rosanne film there for a while?

strmn said:

errant said:

asking the question gives one context on how best to answer it.

I don't find this answer very convincing.

Tough. It's THE answer and explanation. Take it or leave it. Either way, move on!

alexnvrmnd777 said:

strmn said:

I don't find this answer very convincing.

Tough. It's THE answer and explanation. Take it or leave it. Either way, move on!

Damn, I can't avoid starting a little conflict on my threads, can I? No matter what I do, whether I'm accused of being arrogant or a jerk or Jackass or fool or a "Bait Threader". And that's within 2 days

gunner82 said:

alexnvrmnd777 said:

Tough. It's THE answer and explanation. Take it or leave it. Either way, move on!

Damn, I can't avoid starting a little conflict on my threads, can I? No matter what I do, whether I'm accused of being arrogant or a jerk or Jackass or fool or a "Bait Threader". And that's within 2 days

Lol! Nah, not at all. You're cool!!

alexnvrmnd777 said:

gunner82 said:

Damn, I can't avoid starting a little conflict on my threads, can I? No matter what I do, whether I'm accused of being arrogant or a jerk or Jackass or fool or a "Bait Threader". And that's within 2 days

Lol! Nah, not at all. You're cool!!

Okay then. You too