Lyrically AND musically.

Curious what you think.

there r heaps...

including Adore, When Doves Cry, Dirty Mind, Scandelous, Sign of the Time.....

i can go on and on and on.........

just not thieves in the temple... yuck

physco185 said:

just not thieves in the temple... yuck

^

have you heard Thieves In The Temple.. the 8 minutes extended version?

a masterpiece of a song

all the songs you hate...they can't possibly be bad, they're just ahead of their time.

thedance said:

physco185 said:

just not thieves in the temple... yuck

^

have you heard Thieves In The Temple.. the 8 minutes extended version?

a masterpiece of a song

when he sings it there is no passion... its like he is forced to sing... i find it boring, its the only one... i even rather listen to jughead

I think a LOT of the stuff Prince was doing musically, in general, was ahead of its time. You see now all the new artists and producers are trying to make the kind of music Prince did then.

Also - on an astrology forum we're talking about Neptune going into Pisces, and visually, a lot of the stuff going on with Prince - how he chose to dress himself and and other associated artists (like Sheila E) during the 1980s... that was way ahead of its time. They were wearing stuff then that's gonna fit trends occuring NOW.

physco185 said:

Sign of the Time.....

How so? It's a blues song with lots of delay pedal, then the marching drums that might as well have been playing Tusk. It's aged well, but it's no Computer Blue.

treehouse said:

physco185 said:

Sign of the Time.....

How so? It's a blues song with lots of delay pedal, then the marching drums that might as well have been playing Tusk. It's aged well, but it's no Computer Blue.

the lyrics most def relevant today... and possibly for the next 30 years

the beat is awesome..... even my teenage kids like it - and the way i c it... they r best judges for whats hot now

sometimes the simplicity of the beat is all it takes

[Edited 7/3/11 1:42am]

digitalelectric said:

Lyrically AND musically.

Curious what you think.

What does ahead of its time mean? That it's the originater, the inventor? That it's influential on future works by other artists? Is it that it's the first time we hear a particular thing that down the road will be common? I vote for the latter, and as that:

All of the sexual lyrics were ahead of its time, you could say. Though .. was it not merely an escalation of already trending things and themes in the punk fumes of late 70s early 80s?

Musically? Erhh. I'd say (he was part of) the general meltdown of the barrier between black and white music. (Though, some would argue those barriers are back up today).

Technically I think a song like "Something in the Water" was way ahead of its time. Massive Attack could easily fit it in to one of their records, and it wouldn't feel out of place or dated. Nothing on Dirty Mind strikes me as ahead of its time. It's more of an expansion of European influences and black soul to my ears, brilliant as it may be. But would Michael Jackson have made Dangerous if not for a record like Dirty Mind?

But I think a record like Parade could be argued to be one of those records that shows how Dangermouse, Gorillaz and all those blokes thinks music. A grand mishmash of things, pulled together with a heart of soul.

I do not, however, think that either Around the World, SotT or Purple Rain was ahead of their time. The were more of their time, and hugely influential at that.

Anyway. All of that is arguable.

physco185 said:

treehouse said:

How so? It's a blues song with lots of delay pedal, then the marching drums that might as well have been playing Tusk. It's aged well, but it's no Computer Blue.

the lyrics most def relevant today... and possibly for the next 30 years

the beat is awesome..... even my teenage kids like it - and the way i c it... they r best judges for whats hot now

sometimes the simplicity of the beat is all it takes

But social commentary was something that Bob Dylan had done for like 30+ years at the time.

The question was: "what was ahead of its time?".

Sign o' the Times weren't and isn't ahead of its time. It's a brilliant, brilliant track, one of my favorites, but it's not inventing or breaking new ground at all.

Cravens said:

physco185 said:

the lyrics most def relevant today... and possibly for the next 30 years

the beat is awesome..... even my teenage kids like it - and the way i c it... they r best judges for whats hot now

sometimes the simplicity of the beat is all it takes

But social commentary was something that Bob Dylan had done for like 30+ years at the time.

The question was: "what was ahead of its time?".

Sign o' the Times weren't and isn't ahead of its time. It's a brilliant, brilliant track, one of my favorites, but it's not inventing or breaking new ground at all.

every thing he sung about in that song is still current today...... how can that not be ahead if is time????????????????????????????????????????????? esp when its almost 30 years ago when he wrote it!!!!!!!!!!!

[Edited 7/3/11 2:14am]

physco185 said:

Cravens said:

But social commentary was something that Bob Dylan had done for like 30+ years at the time.

The question was: "what was ahead of its time?".

Sign o' the Times weren't and isn't ahead of its time. It's a brilliant, brilliant track, one of my favorites, but it's not inventing or breaking new ground at all.

every thing he sung about in that song is still current today...... how can that not be ahead if is time????????????????????????????????????????????? esp when its almost 30 years ago when he wrote it!!!!!!!!!!!

Clearly we disagree on what "ahead of its time" means. To you it appears as to mean "keeping relevant" or "current". To me it means that a song is showcasing elements that isn't going to be trendy until sometime in the future. Like Something in the Water that seems 1990s years before the 1990s.

So naturally, I can't agree that Sign o' the Times because of its lyrical relevance was "ahead" of its time. Anyone who ever wrote about trouble in Middle East, wars by the USA, oil crises, evironmental issues, government failure, civil rights ect. are relevant still and will be for another hundred years, if not for ever. Every love song ever written is "ahead of its time" then. When is love ever not relevant? And yet Rick Ashley's "Never Gonna Give You Up" isn't as hip to future trends as Prince's "If I Was Your Girlfriend".

Besides that, can a lyric really be ahead of its time, like, ever?

[Edited 7/3/11 2:25am]

Cravens said:

physco185 said:

every thing he sung about in that song is still current today...... how can that not be ahead if is time????????????????????????????????????????????? esp when its almost 30 years ago when he wrote it!!!!!!!!!!!

Clearly we disagree on what "ahead of its time" means. To you it appears as to mean "keeping relevant" or "current". To me it means that a song is showcasing elements that isn't going to be trendy until sometime in the future. Like Something in the Water that seems 1990s years before the 1990s.

So naturally, I can't agree that Sign o' the Times because of its lyrical relevance was "ahead" of its time. Anyone who ever wrote about trouble in Middle East, wars by the USA, oil crises, evironmental issues, government failure, civil rights ect. are relevant still and will be for another hundred years, if not for ever. Every love song ever written is "ahead of its time" then. When is love ever not relevant? And yet Rick Ashley's "Never Gonna Give You Up" isn't as hip to future trends as Prince's "If I Was Your Girlfriend".

Besides that, can a lyric really be ahead of its time, like, ever?

[Edited 7/3/11 2:25am]

u r prob right... to me the fact that its still relevant now means it was ahead of its time...

its cool like iu said b4... it a matter of opinion

physco185 said:

u r prob right... to me the fact that its still relevant now means it was ahead of its time...

its cool like iu said b4... it a matter of opinion

Fair enough

[Edited 7/3/11 4:55am]

Somethin In The Water comes instantly to mind

treehouse said:

physco185 said:

Sign of the Time.....

How so? It's a blues song with lots of delay pedal, then the marching drums that might as well have been playing Tusk. It's aged well, but it's no Computer Blue.

"Computer Blue"???? Usually always voted the worst song on "Purple Rain". "Take Me With U" also gets 2nd most hated song. For non prince fanatics I mean.

Back in 1985 when I first heard a cassette of "Purple Rain" that a friend of mine snuck onto the b-side of a copy of the Dune soundtrack, I gave it a chance. I thought Computer Blue sounded very lame on that first listen, I cringed at the guitar solo (the part that follows the melody of "Father's Song") and felt it to be the most backwards song on the whole album. "When Doves Cry" and "I Would Die 4 U" were the most innovative songs. I still think they are!

The long bootleg versions of "Computer Blue" make it much cooler, but those verses, melody, and that chorus on the main part of the song still sound a bit lame to me.

COMPUTER BLUE

xlr8r said:

COMPUTER BLUE

^ I would court, molest, rape, and marry this song

All the songs on "Purple Rain" were and still are ahead of their times, IMO.

ecstasy said:

xlr8r said:

COMPUTER BLUE

^ I would court, molest, rape, and marry this song

and I'd be right there filming, jerking off

Music is not technology...it doesn't progress really. Is Mozart or the Beatles outdated now? Is Justin Bieber a further evolution of what Prince started??? The whole premise of this thread doesn't really make sense.

FunkiestOne said:

Music is not technology...it doesn't progress really. Is Mozart or the Beatles outdated now? Is Justin Bieber a further evolution of what Prince started??? The whole premise of this thread doesn't really make sense.

relax

physco185 said:

there r heaps...

including Adore, When Doves Cry, Dirty Mind, Scandelous, Sign of the Time.....

i can go on and on and on.........

just not thieves in the temple... yuck

Are u mad???Thieves in the temple is a great song esp the remix!!! Who got the body who got the body who??????

FunkiestOne said:

Music is not technology...it doesn't progress really. Is Mozart or the Beatles outdated now? Is Justin Bieber a further evolution of what Prince started??? The whole premise of this thread doesn't really make sense.

Not true, if you compare music from centuries ago to music 50 years ago to music now, you can see a lot of new ideas of what constitutes music and new patterns invented or old ones discarded. Just like any art form, from visual art to new things like movies.

• Something in the Water
• Head
• Computer Blue
• DMSR
• Get It Up

Soul Psychodelicide (the most dense Clinton collab version)

Tick Tick Bang (the 1990 version)

Positivity

Eye No

Forever in My Life

Strange Relationship

Illusion Coma Pimp n Circumstance

Kiss

Batdance

Glam Slam '91

Tambourine

Days of Wild (studio version only! The live one is standard arrangement/tone of funk)

Rave into the Joy Fantastic

Dance On

I'm going for the music and production style as a basis...

[Edited 7/3/11 12:04pm]

ufoclub said:

"Computer Blue"???? Usually always voted the worst song on "Purple Rain". "Take Me With U" also gets 2nd most hated song. For non prince fanatics I mean.

Eh. Popularity isn't really what we're judging here.

Besides, Prince fanatics aren't always the best judge of what's ground breaking, and as far as cringe worthy lyrics "Where is my love life" ranks far below lines from Kiss, Cream, Glam Slam, etc. The reason a lot of people don't like Computer Blue is *because* it's so out there and ahead. The beat's basic, the guitar runs are generic, and still it's unlike any other song then or now. The structure and themes are way, way out there. Someone could write a dissertation on that alone.

The Ballad of Dorothy Parker.

Listening to his released/unreleased music equally, I could say with confidence that the whole Dream Factory sessions endured and will continue to endure time than most of his music.