what do people have against ATWIAD and Parade? Isaw another thread recently saying P shud have followed PR with an album including dance electric etc.... Maybe its all about record sales, in that case folks shud understand low sales does not diminish Prince as an artist in any way OK! imo SOTT is overated and i always skip tracks on it, always seemed like just a random collection of unpolished songs. ATWIAD and Parade are superior.

Around The World In A Day, is a masterpiece.

EXCELLENT album, never mind the mainstream audience did not understand this fine album......

I every note on this album.........

Also speaking from memory, ATWIAD was not what anyone I knew either expected or wanted from Prince at that time. I do remember thinking, after someone at school told me about it, "he has another album out already?" A bike ride to Harmony House confirmed that.

Obviously everyone was a fan of Purple Rain . . . but on top of that, most were fans of 1999. To me, Purple Rain will always be the more polished (but not necessarily "better") version of 1999.

So, to that point, we all expected and wanted another Purple Rain . . . maybe "slightly" tweaked, but still in that style.

Now - having said that, I still will argue that ATWIAD is not THAT different from Purple Rain and I do love the album.

Se7en said:

I still will argue that ATWIAD is not THAT different from Purple Rain

I agree. Apart from the title track and Condition of the Heart, I'd say there are more similarities than there are dissimilarities.

To me, Around the World in a Day sounds like all the little toys on The Kid's shelf in the movie Purple Rain... if that makes any sense.

Se7en said:

Also speaking from memory, ATWIAD was not what anyone I knew either expected or wanted from Prince at that time. I do remember thinking, after someone at school told me about it, "he has another album out already?" A bike ride to Harmony House confirmed that.

Obviously everyone was a fan of Purple Rain . . . but on top of that, most were fans of 1999. To me, Purple Rain will always be the more polished (but not necessarily "better") version of 1999.

So, to that point, we all expected and wanted another Purple Rain . . . maybe "slightly" tweaked, but still in that style.

Now - having said that, I still will argue that ATWIAD is not THAT different from Purple Rain and I do love the album.

The excitement was so hi at the time, and seeing Purple Rain kinda opened us up to Prince's world. Which the movie and most of the people in it were real parts of Prince's life. Purple Rain for those who just became fans with that album, cause a lot of people to go back and start buy his other albums. Raspberry Beret got soaked up people loved it, then the video just took us to another place and the video (received an award) or something like that. So even those who were expecting PR2 we really didn't know what to expect. Rasperry Beret set us up with a touch of newness but a touch of similarities to Take Me With U. When ATWIAD dropped 2 me it was the right time, because we really didn't expect it but it kept us wondering and expecting. 1984-1986 was seriously creative time for Prince camp and music from everywhere was just happening the B sides & long version, 4 the Tears in Your Eyes promos etc etc it was an exciting time...

eyewishuheaven said:

Se7en said:

I still will argue that ATWIAD is not THAT different from Purple Rain

I agree. Apart from the title track and Condition of the Heart, I'd say there are more similarities than there are dissimilarities.

To me, Around the World in a Day sounds like all the little toys on The Kid's shelf in the movie Purple Rain... if that makes any sense.

lol I totally know what u mean, I've always thought ATWIAD felt like the backstage dressing rooms halls of 1st Avenue and the Kids home and basement living space with all those rooms wondering what behind there... It feels more like his intimate thoughts and emotions that he didn't want to put out on stage.

NouveauDance said:

I understand what the OP means by ATWIAD/Parade "selling out", but I don't think that terminology is quite right. You mean appealing to the white market as 'selling out'?.... I disagree, but I think that's what you meant.

'Selling out', would surely have been milking Purple Rain till it was a withered husk by, I dunno a sixth or seventh single (*cough* MJ & Janet *cough*), and touring the shit out of the album all around the world, not just the USA and then waiting till 1987 to release a pale follow up of the same ilk (*cough* M.... you get the idea).

I don't really see it as going for the white market or selling out, I think Prince was trying to expand his repertoire. During the time between Purple Rain and SOTT, Prince was burning through a lot of influences, not all of them "psychedelic" and "Beatles-esque" - what about Miles Davis and dipping his toe into Jazz-Funk? The Flesh and Madhouse, are they 'white'/sellout projects? New Position and Girls & Boys don't sound particularly "white" either.

If Prince wanted to expand his audience and sell out by going 'white', he fucked that up, because ATWIAD and Parade sales pale in comparison to PR. If there was any argument for selling out and going "white"/mainstream, wouldn't that be Purple Rain? He didn't want to fuck the taste out of anyone's mouth on that album

Purple Rain might've put him on the map, but the albums that followed up to Lovesexy kept him there. If Prince didn't challenged himself with the 85-87 period, he'd probably be looked upon much more as one of those artists at the time who had a huge hit as part of the zeitgeist, then they were creatively spent, which Prince wasn't, and isn't seen as being. If anything the success of PR allowed him to reach outside his comfort zone and become that artist who sits up there with the other greats of 20th century popular music (and eventually cocoon himself into artistic lethargy, but that's another thread).

"That's why I gotta get on my own way
That's the new golden rule....

There's a misconception that says
Everything on the one (Everything on the one)
And my first reaction is just try 2 have a little fun"

That's basically what I think what Prince's career was about between 1999 and Lovesexy.

U´re so right!!!

He did lose a lot of PR fans but he gained a lot of respect as a musician, especially in Europe.

But I can understand why people wanted another follow up 2 PR.

I bought 3 Prince albums on the same day, 1999-PR and ATWIAD wich was just released.

I only knew the 1999 single and had the PR album on tape. When we came home 2 my friend´s house we put on ATWIAD and he said: what the f**k is that???

ATWIAD was a big dissapointment 4 many, but Raspberry Beret and also Pop Life and America

saved the album from a total flop.

I liked the album but years I asked myself, what if he had waited 6 years like MJ after Thriller?

Or only 3 years; releasing SOTT with the hits of ATWIAD and Parade!!!

But NouveauDance is right, he is respected 4 what he has done the way he did it

[Edited 11/19/11 10:50am]

The way I see it is that after Purple Rain prince started experimenting. Has her experimented it got stronger and stronger, until it climaxed with the masterpiece that is Sign O' The Times. If it went straight from PR to SOTT it just wouldn't fit.

I get what you're saying. And it'd be interesting to see how things went if this did happen.

But for me personally, I'd really miss ATWIAD and Parade.

HobbesLeCute said:

cdog572 said:

cdog572 said:

Prince should have reordered his album releases from worst to best, so that we'd still have 1999, Purple Rain, and Sign o the Times to look forward to, which will be such a relief after 30-40 years of mediocre stuff!

Last song--Purple Rain, then bam! Instant death.

Prince totally should have done that.

[Edited 11/19/11 22:49pm]

NDRU said:

Prince should have reordered his album releases from worst to best, so that we'd still have 1999, Purple Rain, and Sign o the Times to look forward to, which will be such a relief after 30-40 years of mediocre stuff!

Last song--Purple Rain, then bam! Instant death.

Prince totally should have done that.

That works for me!

Se7en said:

Also speaking from memory, ATWIAD was not what anyone I knew either expected or wanted from Prince at that time. I do remember thinking, after someone at school told me about it, "he has another album out already?" A bike ride to Harmony House confirmed that.

Obviously everyone was a fan of Purple Rain . . . but on top of that, most were fans of 1999. To me, Purple Rain will always be the more polished (but not necessarily "better") version of 1999.

This is what I also remember. As a matter of fact, Purple Rain is not what I expected. 1999 part 2 is what the fans that I talked to were looking out for. I prefer 1999 over Purple Rain.

SoulAlive said:

MadamGoodnight said:

The only song I listened to on ATWIAD was Pop Life, and then the B Sides, the rest I skipped. On Parade, the only song I love is Anotherloverholenyohead. The rest I skip to this day. I hate Raspberry Beret. It's probably not a common opinion around here, but IDGAF.

SOTT got me right back into things. Housequake, SOTT, If I was Your GF, Hot Thing, Adore.....yessssss!

I had epic battles with the Michael Jackson fans back then, SOTT vs. Bad. Thank you Princey!

I never really liked ATWIAD,either.There are a few decent tracks but it's an album that I rarely listen to these days.I was thrilled when SOTT was released.Songs like "Housequake" and "It" are exactly the type of songs I wanted to hear from Prince....not silly stuff like "Raspberry Beret"!

eyewishuheaven said:

For what it's worth, here's a list of songs on Sign o' the Times that I don't think could have existed without Around the World in a Day and Parade:

• Play in the Sunshine
• Starfish and Coffee
• Slow Love
• The Cross
• It's Gonna be a Beautiful Night

Whatever that means.

Those songs weren't my favorites on SOTT anyway. It wouldn't have made much difference to me.

In hindsight looking back, Prince was already expanding his sound on the Purple Rain album, IMO. Also, I think he chose the name "Prince and the Revolution" to allow other band members to contribute in his evolution to experiment with other sounds and not be pigeonhold into an R&B/Funk artist.

cdog572 said:

SoulAlive said:

In the 80s,superstars like Michael Jackson and Madonna were taking a few years between albums.Can you imagine if Prince hadn't released any new albums in 1985 and 1986,and came back in 1987 with 'SOTT'?

. I agree. Either way would have kept Princemania on the upswing.Most people here in the U.S prefer the Prince Era 1978-1984.It has become embarrassing nowadays to be a Prince fan in America.

"It has become embarrassing nowadays to be a Prince fan in America."

Why are u even on here then, if so embarrassing for ya?!?!?!

wally1970 said:

Plus prince was furious he didnt get all his money from purple rain . Whoever wrote this post thinks exactly the way the greedy record executives that prince hates do , hes got balls , prince , for going underground and not sellimg out. Hell u dont think he couldnt release twenty purple rains if he wanted to , damm man

I'm starting to think it's literally impossible for Prince to release another Purple Rain, and has been impossible since the late 1980s.

Lemme explain. By 'releasing another purple rain' I assume you mean releasing an album that sells a huge amount. If you're talking about releasing an album as good as PR, well, I don't see why not.

But if you're talking about Prince putting out an album that sells millions and millions, I don't think so. I think to sell those kinds of numbers you need to be selling to kids/teenagers, and you can't hold on to that demographic forever. An artist like Prince can get the attention of the money-spending youth in 1984, but in 1989 those same youths are a little older and probably less into spending money on music, and the new batch of kids with money won't be into 'yesterday's' pop star.

I mean, try convincing a little girl to listen to Prince over Katy Perry. It's ridiculous! But the little girl is exactly the person you need to sell records to in order to push millions and millions of units. The same argument shows why Prince couldn't have had a Purple Rain in the 90s - try telling a 13 year old boy in 1994 to buy Prince over Nirvana... I think you can run the same argument in 1989 as well.

In fact I'm suspicious of the whole notion that Europe is more into Parade and SOTT because of the way those albums sound. I suspect that, really, those albums did better overseas simply because the European money-spending youth of 1987 viewed Prince as new. (Purple Rain wasn't a pop culture phenomenon in Europe, was it?)

Anyway. My guess is that pop stars can only hold on to huge success for around 7 years, tops. Roughly the time it takes for someone to go from age 11 to age 18.

fusk said:

wally1970 said:

Plus prince was furious he didnt get all his money from purple rain . Whoever wrote this post thinks exactly the way the greedy record executives that prince hates do , hes got balls , prince , for going underground and not sellimg out. Hell u dont think he couldnt release twenty purple rains if he wanted to , damm man

I'm starting to think it's literally impossible for Prince to release another Purple Rain, and has been impossible since the late 1980s.

Lemme explain. By 'releasing another purple rain' I assume you mean releasing an album that sells a huge amount. If you're talking about releasing an album as good as PR, well, I don't see why not.

But if you're talking about Prince putting out an album that sells millions and millions, I don't think so. I think to sell those kinds of numbers you need to be selling to kids/teenagers, and you can't hold on to that demographic forever. An artist like Prince can get the attention of the money-spending youth in 1984, but in 1989 those same youths are a little older and probably less into spending money on music, and the new batch of kids with money won't be into 'yesterday's' pop star.

I mean, try convincing a little girl to listen to Prince over Katy Perry. It's ridiculous! But the little girl is exactly the person you need to sell records to in order to push millions and millions of units. The same argument shows why Prince couldn't have had a Purple Rain in the 90s - try telling a 13 year old boy in 1994 to buy Prince over Nirvana... I think you can run the same argument in 1989 as well.

In fact I'm suspicious of the whole notion that Europe is more into Parade and SOTT because of the way those albums sound. I suspect that, really, those albums did better overseas simply because the European money-spending youth of 1987 viewed Prince as new. (Purple Rain wasn't a pop culture phenomenon in Europe, was it?)

Anyway. My guess is that pop stars can only hold on to huge success for around 7 years, tops. Roughly the time it takes for someone to go from age 11 to age 18.

I think people can only get that 1 superstar album, Prince had a better chance of it in the 1980's

I also don't think we can ever have that superStar status that we find with people out of the 1980's like Madonna Michael Prince Bruce and a few other

I believe PR was a pop culture phenomenon in Europe

and 1st Avenue became purple mecca, people from all over the world were traveling to get there

fusk said:

wally1970 said:

Plus prince was furious he didnt get all his money from purple rain . Whoever wrote this post thinks exactly the way the greedy record executives that prince hates do , hes got balls , prince , for going underground and not sellimg out. Hell u dont think he couldnt release twenty purple rains if he wanted to , damm man

I'm starting to think it's literally impossible for Prince to release another Purple Rain, and has been impossible since the late 1980s.

Lemme explain. By 'releasing another purple rain' I assume you mean releasing an album that sells a huge amount. If you're talking about releasing an album as good as PR, well, I don't see why not.

But if you're talking about Prince putting out an album that sells millions and millions, I don't think so. I think to sell those kinds of numbers you need to be selling to kids/teenagers, and you can't hold on to that demographic forever. An artist like Prince can get the attention of the money-spending youth in 1984, but in 1989 those same youths are a little older and probably less into spending money on music, and the new batch of kids with money won't be into 'yesterday's' pop star.

I mean, try convincing a little girl to listen to Prince over Katy Perry. It's ridiculous! But the little girl is exactly the person you need to sell records to in order to push millions and millions of units. The same argument shows why Prince couldn't have had a Purple Rain in the 90s - try telling a 13 year old boy in 1994 to buy Prince over Nirvana... I think you can run the same argument in 1989 as well.

In fact I'm suspicious of the whole notion that Europe is more into Parade and SOTT because of the way those albums sound. I suspect that, really, those albums did better overseas simply because the European money-spending youth of 1987 viewed Prince as new. (Purple Rain wasn't a pop culture phenomenon in Europe, was it?)

Anyway. My guess is that pop stars can only hold on to huge success for around 7 years, tops. Roughly the time it takes for someone to go from age 11 to age 18.

good valid points, however the comments about why atwiad, parade were better received in europe i don't agree with. purple rain-lovesexy was his most varied, interesting, creative period and thats what we bought into.

fusk said:

Astasheiks said:

cdog572 said:

SoulAlive said: . I agree. Either way would have kept Princemania on the upswing.Most people here in the U.S prefer the Prince Era 1978-1984.It has become embarrassing nowadays to be a Prince fan in America.

"It has become embarrassing nowadays to be a Prince fan in America."

So why are u even on here then, if its so embarrassing for ya to be a Prince fan right now?!?!?!

Worth repeating cdog572, hee hee

[Edited 11/21/11 14:39pm]

robertgeorgeakabob said:

good valid points, however the comments about why atwiad, parade were better received in europe i don't agree with. purple rain-lovesexy was his most varied, interesting, creative period and thats what we bought into.

So why did Europeans dig the new sound and Americans, not so much? I think we agree that it isn't because Americans are 'just inherently more narrow-minded' or anything like that - after all, Americans just a few years earlier were really into the weird gender-bending dude with the fresh new sound. I think it's because the American audience got used to one thing and then were alienated by the post PR stuff. In Europe, did Prince have enough of a following pre-Purple Rain that could be alienated? I'm not from Europe and I wasn't alive then, so I dunno, but my feeling is that Prince's European audience grew a little bit after his American audience (for example, he did many major tours of North America before going to Europe for Parade). So in America, a lot of Prince fans heard Parade and thought, 'nope, not for me.. it's too far from how he sounded on Dirty Mind', while in Europe, a lot of Prince fans were saying, 'Hm, maybe I should check out this guy's back catalogue...'

But again, that's all conjecture. I wasn't there.

kangafunk said:

Interesting post I definitely agree with your point about it being impossible for another purple rain in terms of sales, the masses aren't even worried about musical talent these days, as long as the artists are packaged correctly by the media and/or x factor/pop idol, image and artificial hype is all that matters. Not sure about purple rain not being a phenonemon in Europe, I thought it was pretty massive all over the world.

The masses probably weren't ever concerned with musical talent. In the old days having talent was more of a requirement to be a musician than it is now, probably, but that's not the same as saying that the masses were concerned with talent. The best thing talent can bring an artist isn't record sales, it's a lasting legacy and influence with other musicians. Which is why Prince doesn't need another Purple Rain - dude's set for life anyway based on his reputation of being an extremely talented guy.

Generally I think that the way people think is constant, regardless of place or time.

fusk said:

robertgeorgeakabob said:

good valid points, however the comments about why atwiad, parade were better received in europe i don't agree with. purple rain-lovesexy was his most varied, interesting, creative period and thats what we bought into.

So why did Europeans dig the new sound and Americans, not so much? I think we agree that it isn't because Americans are 'just inherently more narrow-minded' or anything like that - after all, Americans just a few years earlier were really into the weird gender-bending dude with the fresh new sound. I think it's because the American audience got used to one thing and then were alienated by the post PR stuff. In Europe, did Prince have enough of a following pre-Purple Rain that could be alienated? I'm not from Europe and I wasn't alive then, so I dunno, but my feeling is that Prince's European audience grew a little bit after his American audience (for example, he did many major tours of North America before going to Europe for Parade). So in America, a lot of Prince fans heard Parade and thought, 'nope, not for me.. it's too far from how he sounded on Dirty Mind', while in Europe, a lot of Prince fans were saying, 'Hm, maybe I should check out this guy's back catalogue...'

But again, that's all conjecture. I wasn't there.

kangafunk said:

Interesting post I definitely agree with your point about it being impossible for another purple rain in terms of sales, the masses aren't even worried about musical talent these days, as long as the artists are packaged correctly by the media and/or x factor/pop idol, image and artificial hype is all that matters. Not sure about purple rain not being a phenonemon in Europe, I thought it was pretty massive all over the world.

The masses probably weren't ever concerned with musical talent. In the old days having talent was more of a requirement to be a musician than it is now, probably, but that's not the same as saying that the masses were concerned with talent. The best thing talent can bring an artist isn't record sales, it's a lasting legacy and influence with other musicians. Which is why Prince doesn't need another Purple Rain - dude's set for life anyway based on his reputation of being an extremely talented guy.

Generally I think that the way people think is constant, regardless of place or time.

Around the World in a Day is very different in sound than Parade

are u talking about Parade's reception in Europe?

I actually don't know how ATWIAD was received. But Europes love affair with Parade

probably also has a lot to do with the fact that Prince was quickly in Europe and ready to

make a new movie there.

I bet if the same happened in the states, mini concert, Prince & band & Sheila E making appearances everywhere, and the stirring of a new movie, America might have had a different level of excitement. Higher than it was.

Bottom line the movie would have shown the music in a different light. Seeing the music performed on film with band would have given it a PR level of interest

I find this discussion hard to reconcile with my personal experience. I was 10 when Purple Rain came out and I remember lots of kids listening to it, playing "Let's Go Crazy" on the juke box (yes, they still had those) at a pizza place we used to go to. But it didn't interest me at the time because I wasn't that into music other kids liked, being a contrarian. When "Raspberry Beret" came out, though, I loved it. I loved the B-side even more ("She's Always In My Hair"). Both songs reminded me of the Beatles, and I'd been listening to a lot of Beatles music the previous year. When I bought the album, I loved it as well. I don't know how many other kids fell into my category, but ATWIAD definitely made him one new fan. Later on I came to love Purple Rain and all the earlier albums, but it was "Raspberry Beret" that hooked me on Prince. SOTT, by contrast, took a few listends before I really "got" it.