Militant said:

njin said:

"If Dylan and McCartney hadn't have done those things, someone else would have." - Prove it.

You'd have to be a moron to believe that nobody else would have written autobiographical songs in a comtemporary fashion or play bass the way McCartney did if they didn't. And how is anyone supposed to "prove" a hypothetical scenario? LOL

Now, it's you who is not getting it. Of course, you can't prove a hypothetical scenario, because a hypothesis by definition a guess! You guess if Dylan and McCartney hadn't come along, someone else would have eventually and did what they did, exactly the way they did it. That's quite a presumption! Even if that were the case, that said person would be important as Dylan and McCartney is in our current reality, here on Planet Earth!

By your definition no artist or historical figure is of any value, because if they didn't make their contribution, eventually someone else would have! I've got news for you; it's been 40 years since the break-up and no one has come along yet to come close to challenging what The Beatles did over the course of 13 albums recorded over 8 years.

Regarding Jamerson, of course he's great. As much as you would like it to be, influence is not a contest. McCartney was surely influenced by the Motown records, and he equally influenced other Motown artists, including to a very large extent, Stevie Wonder.

And Jamerson couldn't have done what he did without the earlier contributions of Jimmy Blanton and Charles Mingus.

[Edited 6/13/11 22:44pm]

NDRU said:

Imaginative said:

You are obviously young and not musically educated.

a.) Prince was not the first to use a drum-machine. No where near. He also didn't INVENT the drum machine, like Dylan invented the modern singer-songwriter and McCartney invented a new approach to bass. Actually, the first use of an automated rhythm track being recorded in pop music... hmmmm... oh yeah, The Beatles again in 1968. (There may be earlier instances that someone more knowledgable in music than you could quote.)

b.) "If Dylan and McCartney hadn't have done those things, someone else would have." Prove it. You take it for granted what huge innovations these were. The fact that remains that it wasn't "someone else," who made these contributions. It was The Beatles and Dylan. If it were "someone else," then that "someone else" would be the one influencing all that followed.

c.) "In fact, there were likely people doing those things before Dylan and McCartney." If you listened to or had any understanding of any music prior to 1976 or so, perhaps you could cite YOUR sources.

First off I am a huge fan of Beatles & Dylan, so I recognize their contributions, but don't you think there are other examples of singer/songwriters before the 60's such as Robert Johnson (or a slew of blues artists), Chuck Berry, The Everly Brothers, Buddy Holly, Pete Seeger, Woody Guthrie, Ray Charles...

Surely the first inversion chord was used in classical music hundreds of years before McCartney did it on electric bass? It's a pretty basic (no pun intended) idea.

I know styles change, but did Dylan & McCartney really invent anything, or did they just do what they did really really well? Even they were influenced by people, and there was other music in the 60's like Motown, and they were all influencing each other. It's a big melting pot. the Beatles were a huge piece of cheese in the pot, no doubt, but not the only cheese.

[Edited 6/13/11 16:22pm]

Sorry, missed this post earlier.

Dylan was not the first singer to write. But he did invent what became known as the modern singer-songwriter. Before him, most pop music and even blues revolved around regurgitated cliches, love songs, and the like. He was the first to take a deeply personal approach. He was also the first to employ a impressionistic approach to popular music lyric writing.

Yes, classical music has utilized chord inversions since Bach. But we're discussing pop music. The way McCartney employed and wrote bass lines that were independent of the overlying harmony, inverted melodies, etc. was entirely new to pop music. The simplest way to put it, he was among the first to have melodic hooks in the bass. Yes, JB and many early R&B acts also had hooky bass lines, but they were still rhythm/groove based. McCartney elevated bass out of the rhythm section, while still being an essential part of the rhythm section.

Yes, as I said in my earlier posts... of course they had influences as well. And yes, it was a big melting pot. But they made contributions on such a massive scale, that it is impossible to even calculate.

blackbob said:

just to get back to the actual thread's title...

why on earth would you want to do that?!

Imaginative said:

NDRU said:

First off I am a huge fan of Beatles & Dylan, so I recognize their contributions, but don't you think there are other examples of singer/songwriters before the 60's such as Robert Johnson (or a slew of blues artists), Chuck Berry, The Everly Brothers, Buddy Holly, Pete Seeger, Woody Guthrie, Ray Charles...

Surely the first inversion chord was used in classical music hundreds of years before McCartney did it on electric bass? It's a pretty basic (no pun intended) idea.

I know styles change, but did Dylan & McCartney really invent anything, or did they just do what they did really really well? Even they were influenced by people, and there was other music in the 60's like Motown, and they were all influencing each other. It's a big melting pot. the Beatles were a huge piece of cheese in the pot, no doubt, but not the only cheese.

[Edited 6/13/11 16:22pm]

Sorry, missed this post earlier.

Dylan was not the first singer to write. But he did invent what became known as the modern singer-songwriter. Before him, most pop music and even blues revolved around regurgitated cliches, love songs, and the like. He was the first to take a deeply personal approach. He was also the first to employ a impressionistic approach to popular music lyric writing.

Yes, classical music has utilized chord inversions since Bach. But we're discussing pop music. The way McCartney employed and wrote bass lines that were independent of the overlying harmony, inverted melodies, etc. was entirely new to pop music. The simplest way to put it, he was among the first to have melodic hooks in the bass. Yes, JB and many early R&B acts also had hooky bass lines, but they were still rhythm/groove based. McCartney elevated bass out of the rhythm section, while still being an essential part of the rhythm section.

Yes, as I said in my earlier posts... of course they had influences as well. And yes, it was a big melting pot. But they made contributions on such a massive scale, that it is impossible to even calculate.

I wouldn't say that Dylan "invented" the modern singer-songwriter any more than Miles Davis "invented" jazz fusion. What both great artists did brilliantly was infuse what was already in existence, polished it, perfected it, then put their individual stamps on it. That's what great artists like Stevie, Beatles, Joni Mitchell, and P did in their respective genres as well.

[Edited 6/13/11 20:47pm]

Lennon seems to credit Chuck Berry for writing meaningful lyrics

http://www.youtube.com/wa...-J_AF7JRgo

Imaginative said:

Anytime Prince has used technology to alter the sound of his singing voice, he is citing The Beatles, who were the first to do so.

Voice modulation techniques have existed since the late-1920s. Early voice alteration units comparable to ring modulators and vocoders were used in many jingles and cartoons, as well as being regularly studied and employed in academic music circles:

One example from 1940:

Your argument is so flawed logically that it doesn't even need to be addressed from that end.

Imaginative said:

I actually think the fact that he's playing a NEWER Dylan song, says a lot about his feelings re: Dylan.

It's possible. It's also possible that the inclusion of the song, performed in the set by the female singers, perhaps reflects an interest in the song itself to showcase the female vocalists - rather than the writer - not unlike the inclusion of Sarah McLachlan's 'Angel' and Amy Winehouse's 'Love Is A Losing Game' (with interest sparked in the Dylan composition more recently, following its inclusion on Adele's first album).

novabrkr said:

Imaginative said:

Anytime Prince has used technology to alter the sound of his singing voice, he is citing The Beatles, who were the first to do so.

Voice modulation techniques have existed since the late-1920s. Early voice alteration units comparable to ring modulators and vocoders were used in many jingles and cartoons, as well as being regularly studied and employed in academic music circles:

One example from 1940:

Your argument is so flawed logically that it doesn't even need to be addressed from that end.

Are you kidding me? If you read the thread, you would see we're talking about popular music here, not special effects, jingles and cartoon sounds! Is that the best you can do? Do you really think this video had a bigger impact on Prince than The Beatles?

You blind fanboys are so ignorant and to quote Chris Rock, you seem to "love not to know!"

Are you really trying to somehow prove that The Beatles were not important? That they didn't alter the course of popular music? Is that really the point you're trying to make?

Go ahead. I'll sit back and enjoy.

[Edited 6/14/11 0:13am]

I don't think most people here are questioning wether he is indirectrly influenced by the Beatles or not. I think most people aknowledge that he is indirectly through other musicians is in some way influenced by the Beatles, because it's impossible to escape the past. And popular music in it's pure sense changed/started in many ways around the time of when Beatles changed some of the "rules" for pop music. However, this doesn't mean he studied them all the way. I use a toothbrush. Does that make me influenced by the innovator of the toothbrush on how to use it correctly? Or maybe indirectly through generations of passing changing the knowledge of how to use it. Just because an artist make things more avaiable to others, doesnt make them directly influencial to that artist. All of this can be said about Prince too in many ways.

However, this thread was never about The Beatles and their influence on Prince. It's about Prince ability to play several instruments on a high or decent level.

Guitar - one of the best guitarists in pop music of all time. Technically many jazz musicians will easily do something more impressive. But I care about music as a whole, and not technique alone.

His feel and personality alone makes me give him a 9/10. A very personal rating, not judged on technique and jazz abilities.

Bass - he doesn't play like wooten or marcus miller. But I have never heard him play weak bass. The worst thing he could possibly do is just playing less hits pr. second. But his mind is just in place when it comes to the importance of the bass in a song structure. And his way of playing this is perfect imo. Rating based on clever playing plus ability, not counting jazz. 9/10

Drums - at best, he's got amazing timing, but isn't a 1000 hits pr second drummer. Prince is known for only showing his professional side. So because of this he has never done anything extremely show off. Also meaning that he probably thought his performance would lack consistansy if he tried. Makes me rate him a 6/10 technical drummer, even though he is a 9/10 on timing and originality. His drumming on the SOTT/LoveSexy tour looks and sounds effortless and great, don't even hear the change when e and sheila e are switching.

Keys -
Technical ability - 7/10 pro, but not elite jazz musician on this instrument either
Originality, presence and performance is a 9/10

I think however it is unfair to count piano and synth as the same instrument. They tend to have different roles in music, and pianists are not nescesarily good at playing synth non weighted and with modulation options, etc. Same as the role of the organ is also different. Bass guitar and guitar is also not the same thing. Prince is more likely to play bass style on the guitar, than the other way around. Drum programming and drumming is very much different things. If you have some experience on different instruments and arrangement, you'd know this.

[Edited 6/14/11 1:07am]

What a moronic reply from you, Imaginative.

By posting the clip above I provided the proof that people have altered the voice of singers by electronic means long before the Beatles. There would have been many other examples of the use of similar technology.

For that matter, that was popular music back in the day. The elements that became associated with rock'n'roll had started to appear in the context of earlier forms of popular music before rock'n'roll became a recognized cultural phenomenon. That also applies to the first use of distorted electric guitar. I'm not sure what your limited idea of "popular music" has to do with it anyway - the studio technology that the Beatles used was the same that was used by the TV-, radio and film industry at the time. The Beatles didn't invent the use of voice modulation, they just had the chance to use it as they were working in a studio environment that had such technology available. They didn't start using it for artistic purposes either, it was used because Lennon didn't feel confident about his voice.

Your comment also shows deep disrespect for the development of experimental and electronic music. The people who came up with the technology and the production techniques were largely employed by the TV and the movie industry first. That's where they made their money from as the recording industry itself wasn't yet interested in their inventions. The pioneers of electronic music like Raymond Scott financed their research by making jingles and selling their compositions for cartoons. People who are interested in the history of electronic music recognize the work they did for TV and movies as important recordings and certainly wouldn't post the "falloff" emoticon as a response when bringing up those works.

Your argument that Prince is "citing" the Beatles because Lennon didn't feel confident about his voice and asked the engineer to change it with modulation is just absurd. Do you really think he had that in mind when he first started using a vocoder on some of his tracks? The funk, disco and electro artists that started using vocoders and ring modulators had most likely science fiction films and cartoons in their minds. When Prince started doing it he arguably had not even paid much attention to the Beatles, he was just using what other artists doing funk and electronic pop music had been doing before him.

Hell, The Beatles were clearly influenced by the music used in cartoons. They even made some of it themselves.

NDRU said:

blackbob said:

just to get back to the actual thread's title...

why on earth would you want to do that?!

.

.

silly me... ...

.

i will just finish up by saying this thread's question is nonsense..prince is one of the great all rounders in modern music...fact

.

[Edited 6/14/11 2:14am]

.

there is no-one in music today who has more respect as a musician and an artist ..from his fellow musicians...than prince...

.

he was recently voted the 7th greatest artist of all time BY his fellow musicians....

.

Do some of your even read what you are typing??? Surely there are at least 6 people who have more respect by their fellow musicians???

Everyone knows 75% of all statistics are made up anyhow.

There is obviously no denying that Prince is a multi-instrumentalist, as he clearly plays more than one instrument well. What this has to do with the beatles et all is rather meaningless.

I think the reality is that the 40+ instruments claim is one which is rather misleading, and no doubt essentially a myth to hype Prince. If someone told me a pop musician could play 40+ instruments I would obviously start with the obvious 4, but then I would say ok do they play, does he play violin? Does he play french horn? does he play clarinet? And the answer would appear to be no, he doesn't play these. And nor does he seem to demonstrate any understanding of these instruments in his music.

Basically 40, nonsense, more like 4, 5 at a push. Maceo is on record talking about Prince's sax playing, and he didn't have a high regard for it. Knocking out a few notes to demonstrate an idea does not an instrumentalist make.

[Edited 6/14/11 2:04am]

Bewdy said:

.

there is no-one in music today who has more respect as a musician and an artist ..from his fellow musicians...than prince...

.

he was recently voted the 7th greatest artist of all time BY his fellow musicians....

.

Do some of your even read what you are typing??? Surely there are at least 6 people who have more respect by their fellow musicians???

Everyone knows 75% of all statistics are made up anyhow.

There is obviously no denying that Prince is a multi-instrumentalist, as he clearly plays more than one instrument well. What this has to do with the beatles et all is rather meaningless.

I think the reality is that the 40+ instruments claim is one which is rather misleading, and no doubt essentially a myth to hype Prince. If someone told me a pop musician could play 40+ instruments I would obviously start with the obvious 4, but then I would say ok do they play, does he play violin? Does he play french horn? does he play clarinet? And the answer would appear to be no, he doesn't play these. And nor does he seem to demonstrate any understanding of these instruments in his music.

Basically 40, nonsense, more like 4, 5 at a push. Maceo is on record talking about Prince's sax playing, and he didn't have a high regard for it. Knocking out a few notes to demonstrate an idea does not an instrumentalist make.

[Edited 6/14/11 2:04am]

i said as a musician AND an artist...everyone above him on that list are either dead or the band has broken up...only living person above him is bob dylan and prince is a far better musician than dylan...

.

.

During his Emancipation tour, he once did an afterparty at a gay club in Tampa called the Mellinium (formerly Solar) and during the set, he played guitar, bass, keyboards and drums. I thought he killed it on bass, and he seemed really good on drums too.

I'm not a musician though, so I don't know for sure. But I was impressed.

Plus, Prince looks goooooooood playing instruments live. A true showman.

wait .. so just because bob dylan doesn't press play on a drum machine and fill his songs with cheesy synth lines prince is automatically a better musician?

the fact that dylan can write and perform songs that outshine prince solely on an acoustic guitar, voice and harmonica is true evidence of highly advanced musicianship .. some might say reliance on gadgets and a 7 to 13 piece band to get your point accross is a bit of a crutch

i'm not arguing whose better, just lending a fair perspective on musicianship

to be topical .. prince plays 4 instruments not 40 .. i think thats been pretty much agreed on at this point

and prince was clearly heavily influenced by both beatles and dylan

prince played "while my guitar gently weaps" and "all along the watchtower" at 2 of his most high profile and widely seen performances .. r+r hall of fame which I still catch on tv all the time .. and the superbowl

prince is a POP musician and being that topically his subject matter is highly sexual and speaks to the lowest common denominator .. as do most pop artists .. his name is out there more than say a musician who bucks the system, writes about more intellectual or poetic subject matter, or someone who doesn not make music that fits the pop format. so prince gets props for his abilities but just because other people rate him in the top 7 doesn't mean there are not hundreds or thousands of lesser known but far more talented musicians that could be considered if they had put there skills to produce pop cheese instead of a less popular or accepted musical format.

hundreds of thousands of "far" more talented musicians? Are you one of them? lol, if Prince sucks so much why do you still follow his carrear? So his music is highly sexual or whatever, whats the point of following him? WHy not listen to hundreds of thousands of better musicians than who are "far" more talented? As far as musicianship is concerned, its not even a contest, prince is much much better than Dylan. Not a contest.

and prince is not a "pop" musician, he is an all rounder who does different genres well. He can write meaningful songs when he wants to, sign of the times is a classic example of one. Then again its difficult to argue with a troll who thinks prince "dabbles" in drumming despite clear video evidence that he is a competent drummer.

Prince is one of the most talented musicians of all time, period. It is hillarious how some musicians on this site are so jealous of his talents, "oh he isnt that good, he sucks". Lol Most of these musicians wish they had one tenth of the talent prince has.

I am not a fanboy. Ofcourse there are musicians who are on prince's level, some even better. But hundreds of thousands? And just because someone does not play "pop" music does not mean they are necessarily better than a pop artist.

[Edited 6/14/11 7:38am]

[Edited 6/14/11 7:40am]

[Edited 6/14/11 7:51am]

If you doubt Prince's proficiency as a multi-instrumentalist, you should read all the interviews with recording engineers in the new Prince In The Studio book - seriously. Among other things, they talk about what an amazing, rock-solid pocket drummer he is. One person talked about how he could lay an entire drum track with no click and no other instruments on tape and even rest for a whole 8 bar break in the middle of the drum part ... then then when laying down the other instruments that actually played during the drum break, the drums came in perfectly after the 8 bars - no slight timing glitches or anything - it was as perfect as if he had been playing to a click the entire time - "inhuman" is how they described it. Yes, he's an incredibly hard worker, but he's also a prodigiously proficient multi-instrumentalist.

How do you define talented musician?

I have tried working with mainy trained musicians in the past to come up with original interesting music, and 90% of the time, the trained musician, the one that does solo concerts at universities, the one that went to reknowned music schools and is classically trained and has eclectic intellectual pop tastes... can't come up with anything remotely original or interesting.

Whereas the untrained musicians I sometimes run into that are constantly recording their own ideas, the ones that can't read or write music, have little knowledge of terminology, come up with stuff that outshines the traditional musician and imparts a stronger emotion and reaction (meaning) on the listener.

So how do you define a talented musician? And is being able to label and mimic complex patterns repeatedly and precisely actually that admirable?

hhhhdmt said:

hundreds of thousands of "far" more talented musicians? Are you one of them? lol, if Prince sucks so much why do you still follow his carrear? So his music is highly sexual or whatever, whats the point of following him? WHy not listen to hundreds of thousands of better musicians than who are "far" more talented? As far as musicianship is concerned, its not even a contest, prince is much much better than Dylan. Not a contest.

and prince is not a "pop" musician, he is an all rounder who does different genres well. He can write meaningful songs when he wants to, sign of the times is a classic example of one. Then again its difficult to argue with a troll who thinks prince "dabbles" in drumming despite clear video evidence that he is a competent drummer.

Prince is one of the most talented musicians of all time, period. It is hillarious how some musicians on this site are so jealous of his talents, "oh he isnt that good, he sucks". Lol Most of these musicians wish they had one tenth of the talent prince has.

I am not a fanboy. Ofcourse there are musicians who are on prince's level, some even better. But hundreds of thousands? And just because someone does not play "pop" music does not mean they are necessarily better than a pop artist.

[Edited 6/14/11 7:38am]

[Edited 6/14/11 7:40am]

[Edited 6/14/11 7:51am]

you sound like a fanboy..... classic poor argument, 'why follow prince, if you are critical of him' doesn't stack up to much.

Can anyone actually put forward a track which aptly demonstrates prince recent drumming prowess, as far as I know he's been getting session drummers in since his earlier career and the likes of irresistable bitch.

TrevorAyer said:

wait .. so just because bob dylan doesn't press play on a drum machine and fill his songs with cheesy synth lines prince is automatically a better musician?

the fact that dylan can write and perform songs that outshine prince solely on an acoustic guitar, voice and harmonica is true evidence of highly advanced musicianship .. some might say reliance on gadgets and a 7 to 13 piece band to get your point accross is a bit of a crutch

i'm not arguing whose better, just lending a fair perspective on musicianship

to be topical .. prince plays 4 instruments not 40 .. i think thats been pretty much agreed on at this point

and prince was clearly heavily influenced by both beatles and dylan

prince played "while my guitar gently weaps" and "all along the watchtower" at 2 of his most high profile and widely seen performances .. r+r hall of fame which I still catch on tv all the time .. and the superbowl

prince is a POP musician and being that topically his subject matter is highly sexual and speaks to the lowest common denominator .. as do most pop artists .. his name is out there more than say a musician who bucks the system, writes about more intellectual or poetic subject matter, or someone who doesn not make music that fits the pop format. so prince gets props for his abilities but just because other people rate him in the top 7 doesn't mean there are not hundreds or thousands of lesser known but far more talented musicians that could be considered if they had put there skills to produce pop cheese instead of a less popular or accepted musical format.

There's many who consider Dylan just an ok instrumentalist. Even most of his fans would never claim that he is an amazing guitar player. His strength lies in great arrangement, feel and poetry, as well as a compelling voice. Comparing them is a bit weird though, since Prince has taken more inspiration from urban music with roots in blues, some people tend to think that he's not subtle enough in his appearance.

People who always need listen to super deep poetry, wrapped inside of metaphors making it more valuable to the "fine" elite, and old fashioned people, might find Prince some what too direct in his language. Maybe too primitive? It's not in his nature to write deep poetry all the time. Not all artists has to write lyrics to make things deeper and more meaningful. Sometimes the simpler the better. His lyrics suits his personality and style very well.

If the synths on 1999 were too cheesy, and the drum programming wasn't original. 1999 wouldn't have half the impact it has on modern urban music. Comparing it to both popular and underground music at the time, the production on this records is extremly well put together. The balance between all the sounds is really nothing to fuck with.

Put Renato to play the Oberheim like Prince and Dr. Fink did on records like 1999, Controversy and Dirty Mind, and he'll admit that it's a huge differenct except knowing where to put the fingers. The role it has in an arrangement, modulation and such is way different from a piano. Most accoustic pianist can't fuck with that shit.

And I disagree that there are thousands of lesser known but far more talented musicians. If Prince focused on alot less pop oriented music, I'm pretty sure he'd have no problem making as whooping music still, atleast on his best years. There are many technically elite players out there that on technical skills would win that kind of sports, but the distinct sound of prince nobody can fuck with. His personality alone outshines most other comparable artists. I listen to alot of underground electro, boogie, dance and funk. And there's alot of funky stuff, but mostly it all sounds the same, so no.

Bewdy said:

hhhhdmt said:

hundreds of thousands of "far" more talented musicians? Are you one of them? lol, if Prince sucks so much why do you still follow his carrear? So his music is highly sexual or whatever, whats the point of following him? WHy not listen to hundreds of thousands of better musicians than who are "far" more talented? As far as musicianship is concerned, its not even a contest, prince is much much better than Dylan. Not a contest.

and prince is not a "pop" musician, he is an all rounder who does different genres well. He can write meaningful songs when he wants to, sign of the times is a classic example of one. Then again its difficult to argue with a troll who thinks prince "dabbles" in drumming despite clear video evidence that he is a competent drummer.

Prince is one of the most talented musicians of all time, period. It is hillarious how some musicians on this site are so jealous of his talents, "oh he isnt that good, he sucks". Lol Most of these musicians wish they had one tenth of the talent prince has.

I am not a fanboy. Ofcourse there are musicians who are on prince's level, some even better. But hundreds of thousands? And just because someone does not play "pop" music does not mean they are necessarily better than a pop artist.

[Edited 6/14/11 7:38am]

[Edited 6/14/11 7:40am]

[Edited 6/14/11 7:51am]

you sound like a fanboy..... classic poor argument, 'why follow prince, if you are critical of him' doesn't stack up to much.

Can anyone actually put forward a track which aptly demonstrates prince recent drumming prowess, as far as I know he's been getting session drummers in since his earlier career and the likes of irresistable bitch.

I never said he is an amazing drummer, he is not. I said he is a competent drummer. If i was a fanboy, i would be going "oh no he is the best at everything, guitar, drums, piano etc". He isnt, although he is terrefic all round. I dont see anything wrong with stating he is a competent but not outstanding drummer.

hhhhdmt said:

Bewdy said:

you sound like a fanboy..... classic poor argument, 'why follow prince, if you are critical of him' doesn't stack up to much.

Can anyone actually put forward a track which aptly demonstrates prince recent drumming prowess, as far as I know he's been getting session drummers in since his earlier career and the likes of irresistable bitch.

I never said he is an amazing drummer, he is not. I said he is a competent drummer. If i was a fanboy, i would be going "oh no he is the best at everything, guitar, drums, piano etc". He isnt, although he is terrefic all round. I dont see anything wrong with stating he is a competent but not outstanding drummer.

The first Madhouse album is the only document of Prince playing drums probably to the best of his ability. The album was only him and Eric Leeds. So check it out.

But, How do you define talented musician?

Bewdy said:

hhhhdmt said:

hundreds of thousands of "far" more talented musicians? Are you one of them? lol, if Prince sucks so much why do you still follow his carrear? So his music is highly sexual or whatever, whats the point of following him? WHy not listen to hundreds of thousands of better musicians than who are "far" more talented? As far as musicianship is concerned, its not even a contest, prince is much much better than Dylan. Not a contest.

and prince is not a "pop" musician, he is an all rounder who does different genres well. He can write meaningful songs when he wants to, sign of the times is a classic example of one. Then again its difficult to argue with a troll who thinks prince "dabbles" in drumming despite clear video evidence that he is a competent drummer.

Prince is one of the most talented musicians of all time, period. It is hillarious how some musicians on this site are so jealous of his talents, "oh he isnt that good, he sucks". Lol Most of these musicians wish they had one tenth of the talent prince has.

I am not a fanboy. Ofcourse there are musicians who are on prince's level, some even better. But hundreds of thousands? And just because someone does not play "pop" music does not mean they are necessarily better than a pop artist.

[Edited 6/14/11 7:38am]

[Edited 6/14/11 7:40am]

[Edited 6/14/11 7:51am]

you sound like a fanboy..... classic poor argument, 'why follow prince, if you are critical of him' doesn't stack up to much.

Can anyone actually put forward a track which aptly demonstrates prince recent drumming prowess, as far as I know he's been getting session drummers in since his earlier career and the likes of irresistable bitch.

it always adds something to the music working with other musicians, as he always have. Wether it's in studio, practicing or live on stage. Sometimes because one isn't able to produce the sound alone, or just because it's social and smart to integrate band members in recordings.

Bewdy said:

as far as I know he's been getting session drummers in since his earlier career and the likes of irresistable bitch.

Meaning you think he did or didn't play the drums on Irrisistible Bitch?

ufoclub said:

Bewdy said:

as far as I know he's been getting session drummers in since his earlier career and the likes of irresistable bitch.

Meaning you think he did or didn't play the drums on Irrisistible Bitch?

I thought he played irresistable bitch / bacon skin, but I could be wrong? Personally I think the drumming on that is pretty funky. I personally have no major gripe with Prince being a talented multi musician. I just cant get on board with people who overstate his abilities. And 40+ instrument hype didn't help.

Bewdy said:

ufoclub said:

Meaning you think he did or didn't play the drums on Irrisistible Bitch?

I thought he played irresistable bitch / bacon skin, but I could be wrong? Personally I think the drumming on that is pretty funky. I personally have no major gripe with Prince being a talented multi musician. I just cant get on board with people who overstate his abilities. And 40+ instrument hype didn't help.

Bacon Skin is a jam between Morris Day on drums and Prince on Bass, laying vocals in the style of Chocolate... his vocal voice is based on the way his fathers buddies were talking when hanging out in livingroom, or something like that.

njin said:

I don't think most people here are questioning wether he is indirectrly influenced by the Beatles or not. I think most people aknowledge that he is indirectly through other musicians is in some way influenced by the Beatles, because it's impossible to escape the past. And popular music in it's pure sense changed/started in many ways around the time of when Beatles changed some of the "rules" for pop music.

Some are. And those are the ones to which my posts have been addressed.

Militant stated that he does not and will not listen to ANY music influenced by Dylan or The Beatles. That is the only statement that I've been refuting.

The Beatles didn't simply modulate their voices, they sped them up, slowed them down, played them backwards, fed them through revolving speakers, in short they exploited the technology of the day to do things beyond what it was designed to do. When they did it, it never sounded like a novelty, it sounded perfect. Their music will last for the rest of time.

It doesn't matter if you (not "you" personally, the collective "you" here that is downplaying the importance of The Beatles) acknowledge The Beatles influence or not. Your understanding is not a prerequisite for their influence. I regret that this thread got side-tracked; as I stated Militant simply asked me to name a "singular, Living artist" who has written more great songs than Prince. I named two. The amount of recorded cover versions of the music written McCartney, The Beatles and Dylan vs. Prince is an undeniable testament to this.

I love Prince, and he has written many great songs. I've been listening to him almost non-stop for the past month. But he is not the greatest and most important musician, songwriter, etc. of the 20th Century. He is also not without influences. Part of his greatness is his diversity, that he is influenced by music from all parts of the globe.

[Edited 6/14/11 8:52am]

The bottom line is Prince is far better than average on ANY instrument that he picks up. Give credit where credit is due. Prince is an outstanding musician, songwriter and performer. He works hard at it, it's his life. Ever wonder why he's divorced? Prince cheats on his "real wife", Music, I think her name is.