Pentacle said:

Never could make out what he says at the end of RBHIMA, just at 4:14, before the the spoken 'I'll try to write' part. It's kinda like he's singing/groaning mumbled words. Ahh love Emancipation so much.

artist76 said:

EyeJester7 said:

'Madrid 2 Chicago' - MAYBE, this one was obvious..but not for me..lol. SO after he says; "I got nothing but you on my mind...(His backing vocals come in..) AND you hear "Nothing but eating that pussy..." ..I remember being like when I first heard that..LOL.

Now of course their are many other examples, and not just lyrical examples, but music stabs he's added that sounds very unique. Much like; 'Dolphin' when he says "That stands to catch U when u fall" and then he makes the guitar sounds as if it's falling down. That's very cool too! I am just curious to hear what are some details you probably missed. Sometimes we can look too deep into things and find absurd things..lol....But then their are times where certain perks stand out to you.

[Edited 6/26/12 17:52pm]

"Madrid 2 Chicago" - yup, he says that. It's one of those "it can only be Prince" moments. There are acts that have been sexually explicit in music since the 90s, but he does explicit in a way that's still somehow "classy" or "sensual" in a strange way.

"Music stabs" - in "4ever" after he sings "if I never get to make you laugh" and then musically it sounds like laughter.

I never caught that in '4ever'...Thanks for pointing that out. What a unique stab!

Pentacle said:

NeonCraxx said:

Can somebody scroll up and answer my question about something in the water?

Yes, he smacks the microphone, because he's so angry/emotional. Doesn't he say 'bitch' right before or after?

Yeah I always thought exactly that. That he actually whacked the mic cause he meant that shit!

It's olny fairly recently that I was listening to Irrisistible Bitch really loud

in an excellent pair of headphones and I heard way in the background of the

intro Prince saying "turn the vocal up" or something like that.

It's sounds like it's picked up on a mic from across the room or something.

I think it's right after the first drum hits.

Although maybe everyone else has been hearing all along. I was pretty

amazed that after all those years I finally heard what it was one day

I first heard it through headphones, but in Rippopgodazippa, you can very clearly hear realistic blowjob sounds behind the lyrics "she take it all the way down da throat / right down 2 da hair"

[Edited 6/28/12 18:44pm]

In 17 Days, there's an extra funky bass thump right around the 2 minute mark that forces me to pull out my air bass guitar every time.

It's right between "...beg U 2 B near me. But I know..." **THUMP** "...your head is underwater. I doubt that you could hear me."

luvsexy4all said:

wTF is he saying at end of Future Souil Song????

i hear whispers etc...

"..don't buy bootlegs....they're evil..."

cool thread...

8:04 of rainbow children, you can hear him say 'gimme a 'b'' (or some other band direction).

SmiggyG said:

Nice thread. There are many others that I'd have to sit and think about. I've always found listening to Prince thru headphones exposed so much more whether it be vocals or instruments. I've been sayin this since the late 80's. It always made me appreciate just how much detail he put into a song. At the same time it's too bad most only hear what's at the surface. A good set of headphones is the only way to hear everything going on imo.

Another thing I found years ago was listening to Prince thru a Dolby Pro Logic system you could hear stuff that is not noticable when played thru the surround speakers if I mute the mains. The Gold Exp. is one that jumped out at the time. Pussy Control has all sorts of stuff going on especially the begining.

Hmmm......have to disagree on a few points here.

First off, headphones aren't the only way to hear everything - a proper, audiophile system is the best way to go and will walk all over even the very best headphones. Headphones have their place sure, but its much more difficult for them to produce an authentic soundstage. A mid to high-end hi-fi will deliver all the detail of headphones and more, but decent headphones are a cheaper alternative to getting near that sound.

Second, I don't understand how you are hearing extra details in Pro Logic. Unless the original sound has been encoded in Pro Logic, then you're not getting anything extra. There is literally nothing there for your processor to decode. And what tends to happen with playing unencoded sounds through Pro Logic is that all the information is routed to the centre channel, so you don't even get proper stereo. None of Prince's music is encoded in any sort of surround format. Even when the Rave DVD came out with a DTS soundtrack, its not a TRUE DTS track. There is no centre channel info and the rear "effects" are a very lazy separation of audience ambience.

It could be that you are using Pro Logic II, which will take a standard stereo signal and CONVERT it in to surround, but its cheating and is only giving you what the processor thinks should be there - its a simulation effectively. Either that, or you have some sort of Digital Signal Processing going on, which is doing the same thing. Either way, its not a true representation of the sound. Hence, the extra details you hear are likely false.

The best way to hear stereo music is on a high fidelity, 2-channel stereo and with the right equipment, you'll get all the details and wide soundstage you could ever need.

[Edited 6/29/12 8:28am]

peedub said:

cool thread...

8:04 of rainbow children, you can hear him say 'gimme a 'b'' (or some other band direction).

Its "Gimme a beat" - a direction to John Blackwell.

Mindflux said:

SmiggyG said:

Nice thread. There are many others that I'd have to sit and think about. I've always found listening to Prince thru headphones exposed so much more whether it be vocals or instruments. I've been sayin this since the late 80's. It always made me appreciate just how much detail he put into a song. At the same time it's too bad most only hear what's at the surface. A good set of headphones is the only way to hear everything going on imo.

Another thing I found years ago was listening to Prince thru a Dolby Pro Logic system you could hear stuff that is not noticable when played thru the surround speakers if I mute the mains. The Gold Exp. is one that jumped out at the time. Pussy Control has all sorts of stuff going on especially the begining.

Hmmm......have to disagree on a few points here.

First off, headphones aren't the only way to hear everything - a proper, audiophile system is the best way to go and will walk all over even the very best headphones. Headphones have their place sure, but its much more difficult for them to produce an authentic soundstage. A mid to high-end hi-fi will deliver all the detail of headphones and more, but decent headphones are a cheaper alternative to getting near that sound.

Second, I don't understand how you are hearing extra details in Pro Logic. Unless the original sound has been encoded in Pro Logic, then you're not getting anything extra. There is literally nothing there for your processor to decode. And what tends to happen with playing unencoded sounds through Pro Logic is that all the information is routed to the centre channel, so you don't even get proper stereo. None of Prince's music is encoded in any sort of surround format. Even when the Rave DVD came out with a DTS soundtrack, its not a TRUE DTS track. There is no centre channel info and the rear "effects" are a very lazy separation of audience ambience.

It could be that you are using Pro Logic II, which will take a standard stereo signal and CONVERT it in to surround, but its cheating and is only giving you what the processor thinks should be there - its a simulation effectively. Either that, or you have some sort of Digital Signal Processing going on, which is doing the same thing. Either way, its not a true representation of the sound. Hence, the extra details you hear are likely false.

The best way to hear stereo music is on a high fidelity, 2-channel stereo and with the right equipment, you'll get all the details and wide soundstage you could ever need.

[Edited 6/29/12 8:28am]

I don't understand what you mean by "the extra details you hear are likely false" lol. That is nonseniscal. I also have done this experiment with many Prince CDs using a surround system where I unplugged the front speakers and only got sound from the back speakers. You indeed will hear details that you may miss with the "normal full sound".

Parts of the recorded music are eliminated leaving othere parts to stand out. Like backgound vocals or buried bass lines etc. It can make some songs sound entirely different.

[Edited 6/29/12 8:39am]

tricky99 said:

Mindflux said:

Hmmm......have to disagree on a few points here.

First off, headphones aren't the only way to hear everything - a proper, audiophile system is the best way to go and will walk all over even the very best headphones. Headphones have their place sure, but its much more difficult for them to produce an authentic soundstage. A mid to high-end hi-fi will deliver all the detail of headphones and more, but decent headphones are a cheaper alternative to getting near that sound.

Second, I don't understand how you are hearing extra details in Pro Logic. Unless the original sound has been encoded in Pro Logic, then you're not getting anything extra. There is literally nothing there for your processor to decode. And what tends to happen with playing unencoded sounds through Pro Logic is that all the information is routed to the centre channel, so you don't even get proper stereo. None of Prince's music is encoded in any sort of surround format. Even when the Rave DVD came out with a DTS soundtrack, its not a TRUE DTS track. There is no centre channel info and the rear "effects" are a very lazy separation of audience ambience.

It could be that you are using Pro Logic II, which will take a standard stereo signal and CONVERT it in to surround, but its cheating and is only giving you what the processor thinks should be there - its a simulation effectively. Either that, or you have some sort of Digital Signal Processing going on, which is doing the same thing. Either way, its not a true representation of the sound. Hence, the extra details you hear are likely false.

The best way to hear stereo music is on a high fidelity, 2-channel stereo and with the right equipment, you'll get all the details and wide soundstage you could ever need.

[Edited 6/29/12 8:28am]

I don't understand what you you mean by "the extra details you hear are likely false" lol. That is nonseniscal. I also have done this experiment with many Prince CDs using a surround system where I unplugged the the front speakers and only got sound from the back speakers. You indeed will hear details that you may miss with the "normal sound".

Parts of the recorded music are eliminated leaving othere parts to stand out. Like backgound vocals are buried bass lines etc. It can make some songs sound entirely different.

Its because the processor is artificially generating that sound channel from the source material. The channel doesn't exist, so the processor makes one up. Generally, this is acheived by a phase shift and delay. So, its not a genuine reproduction of the sound. Its taking elements and processing them to achieve a surround sound that isn't really there. Which is precisely why you don't hear them in "normal sound". The processor is simulating and also enhancing certain sounds to try and give that surround impression. Its false.Plug the fronts back in and that rear channel then just sounds like ambience. Take the fronts out (which is not right, they are the MAIN speakers in ANY set-up) and all your attention is on a false soundtrack, so it will sound like something you've not heard before. This will work on any unencoded stereo sound you feed to the processor.

If I removed Prince's vocal and just isolated the reverb, you would also say "I've never heard that sound before". But its not the full picture. Oil paintings get their colours by layering different colours over each other. A skin tone might have been started with a red colour (but could be anything, depending on what you want the final result to be). But, you wouldn't strip back the layers on the Mona Lisa and say "You know, I never realised she was red!". And the processor isn't even doing that - its taking an element of the music and then making up what it thinks should appear in the surround channel to add ambience.

Pro Logic is only Pro Logic when the music is deliberately encoded that way. None of Prince's albums are encoded in surround. Very few albums are. An excellent example of one though, is "Gaucho" by Steely Dan in full DTS. Lush, well thought out and purposefully done in surround.

Mindflux said:

tricky99 said:

I don't understand what you you mean by "the extra details you hear are likely false" lol. That is nonseniscal. I also have done this experiment with many Prince CDs using a surround system where I unplugged the the front speakers and only got sound from the back speakers. You indeed will hear details that you may miss with the "normal sound".

Parts of the recorded music are eliminated leaving othere parts to stand out. Like backgound vocals are buried bass lines etc. It can make some songs sound entirely different.

Its because the processor is artificially generating that sound channel from the source material. The channel doesn't exist, so the processor makes one up. Generally, this is acheived by a phase shift and delay. So, its not a genuine reproduction of the sound. Its taking elements and processing them to achieve a surround sound that isn't really there. Which is precisely why you don't hear them in "normal sound". The processor is simulating and also enhancing certain sounds to try and give that surround impression. Its false.Plug the fronts back in and that rear channel then just sounds like ambience. Take the fronts out (which is not right, they are the MAIN speakers in ANY set-up) and all your attention is on a false soundtrack, so it will sound like something you've not heard before. This will work on any unencoded stereo sound you feed to the processor.

If I removed Prince's vocal and just isolated the reverb, you would also say "I've never heard that sound before". But its not the full picture. Oil paintings get their colours by layering different colours over each other. A skin tone might have been started with a red colour (but could be anything, depending on what you want the final result to be). But, you wouldn't strip back the layers on the Mona Lisa and say "You know, I never realised she was red!". And the processor isn't even doing that - its taking an element of the music and then making up what it thinks should appear in the surround channel to add ambience.

Pro Logic is only Pro Logic when the music is deliberately encoded that way. None of Prince's albums are encoded in surround. Very few albums are. An excellent example of one though, is "Gaucho" by Steely Dan in full DTS. Lush, well thought out and purposefully done in surround.

Mindflux said:

tricky99 said:

I don't understand what you you mean by "the extra details you hear are likely false" lol. That is nonseniscal. I also have done this experiment with many Prince CDs using a surround system where I unplugged the the front speakers and only got sound from the back speakers. You indeed will hear details that you may miss with the "normal sound".

Parts of the recorded music are eliminated leaving othere parts to stand out. Like backgound vocals are buried bass lines etc. It can make some songs sound entirely different.

Its because the processor is artificially generating that sound channel from the source material. The channel doesn't exist, so the processor makes one up. Generally, this is acheived by a phase shift and delay. So, its not a genuine reproduction of the sound. Its taking elements and processing them to achieve a surround sound that isn't really there. Which is precisely why you don't hear them in "normal sound". The processor is simulating and also enhancing certain sounds to try and give that surround impression. Its false.Plug the fronts back in and that rear channel then just sounds like ambience. Take the fronts out (which is not right, they are the MAIN speakers in ANY set-up) and all your attention is on a false soundtrack, so it will sound like something you've not heard before. This will work on any unencoded stereo sound you feed to the processor.

If I removed Prince's vocal and just isolated the reverb, you would also say "I've never heard that sound before". But its not the full picture. Oil paintings get their colours by layering different colours over each other. A skin tone might have been started with a red colour (but could be anything, depending on what you want the final result to be). But, you wouldn't strip back the layers on the Mona Lisa and say "You know, I never realised she was red!". And the processor isn't even doing that - its taking an element of the music and then making up what it thinks should appear in the surround channel to add ambience.

Pro Logic is only Pro Logic when the music is deliberately encoded that way. None of Prince's albums are encoded in surround. Very few albums are. An excellent example of one though, is "Gaucho" by Steely Dan in full DTS. Lush, well thought out and purposefully done in surround.

You are missing the entire point. All that you say may be true (I'm no surround tech) but I don't think the original poster or I am argueing that we are getting a "true" reproduction of the music as it was intended by Prince or his sound engineer.

The manipulation of the sound allows you to hear in insolation parts of the music that are otherwise buried in the mix while also canceling out other parts. So you are hearing the song differently. Some song are more interesting than others. And some will sound like an alternate take of the song. Every Prince fan should try this. Its very fun and intersting.

I have also done this with classic Stevie Wonder and Marvin Gaye. It can give some songs a unplugged feeling while making others sound strange yet familar.

tricky99 said:

Mindflux said:

Its because the processor is artificially generating that sound channel from the source material. The channel doesn't exist, so the processor makes one up. Generally, this is acheived by a phase shift and delay. So, its not a genuine reproduction of the sound. Its taking elements and processing them to achieve a surround sound that isn't really there. Which is precisely why you don't hear them in "normal sound". The processor is simulating and also enhancing certain sounds to try and give that surround impression. Its false.Plug the fronts back in and that rear channel then just sounds like ambience. Take the fronts out (which is not right, they are the MAIN speakers in ANY set-up) and all your attention is on a false soundtrack, so it will sound like something you've not heard before. This will work on any unencoded stereo sound you feed to the processor.

If I removed Prince's vocal and just isolated the reverb, you would also say "I've never heard that sound before". But its not the full picture. Oil paintings get their colours by layering different colours over each other. A skin tone might have been started with a red colour (but could be anything, depending on what you want the final result to be). But, you wouldn't strip back the layers on the Mona Lisa and say "You know, I never realised she was red!". And the processor isn't even doing that - its taking an element of the music and then making up what it thinks should appear in the surround channel to add ambience.

Pro Logic is only Pro Logic when the music is deliberately encoded that way. None of Prince's albums are encoded in surround. Very few albums are. An excellent example of one though, is "Gaucho" by Steely Dan in full DTS. Lush, well thought out and purposefully done in surround.

You are missing the entire point. All that you say may be true (I'm no surround tech) but I don't think the original poster or I am argueing that we are getting a "true" reproduction of the music as it was intended by Prince or his sound engineer.

The manipulation of the sound allows you to hear in insolation parts of the music that are otherwise buried in the mix while also canceling out other parts. So you are hearing the song differently. Some song are more interesting than others. And some will sound like an alternate take of the song. Every Prince fan should try this. Its very fun and intersting.

I have also done this with classic Stevie Wonder and Marvin Gaye. It can give some songs a unplugged feeling while making others sound strange yet familar.

I fully understand what you are saying. And I'm not saying you shouldn't do it either. Its fun, as you say, and you will hear things you may not have picked up on before.

BUT, because its a simulation, some of what you hear may not actually be there. If a processor is simulating what it "thinks" should be there, then it is entirely likely that it is adding something that isn't there in the first place. I'm not saying your suddenly going to hear a guitar that was never there, but you may hear the sound soaked in reverb, or with a weird chorus, that isn't actually there. Its just the processor digitally processing the sound to make it like an actual surround track. The processor doesn't know that you want to hear an isolated part, its trying to emulate and surround track, which is usually an ambient effect.

Its cool though. As I said, I didn't say its wrong, just don't necessarily trust that what you are hearing is a detail you were always missing. It may just be a false interpretation of the original sound.

tricky99 said:

Mindflux said:

Its because the processor is artificially generating that sound channel from the source material. The channel doesn't exist, so the processor makes one up. Generally, this is acheived by a phase shift and delay. So, its not a genuine reproduction of the sound. Its taking elements and processing them to achieve a surround sound that isn't really there. Which is precisely why you don't hear them in "normal sound". The processor is simulating and also enhancing certain sounds to try and give that surround impression. Its false.Plug the fronts back in and that rear channel then just sounds like ambience. Take the fronts out (which is not right, they are the MAIN speakers in ANY set-up) and all your attention is on a false soundtrack, so it will sound like something you've not heard before. This will work on any unencoded stereo sound you feed to the processor.

If I removed Prince's vocal and just isolated the reverb, you would also say "I've never heard that sound before". But its not the full picture. Oil paintings get their colours by layering different colours over each other. A skin tone might have been started with a red colour (but could be anything, depending on what you want the final result to be). But, you wouldn't strip back the layers on the Mona Lisa and say "You know, I never realised she was red!". And the processor isn't even doing that - its taking an element of the music and then making up what it thinks should appear in the surround channel to add ambience.

Pro Logic is only Pro Logic when the music is deliberately encoded that way. None of Prince's albums are encoded in surround. Very few albums are. An excellent example of one though, is "Gaucho" by Steely Dan in full DTS. Lush, well thought out and purposefully done in surround.

That

I appreciate the audiophile take on it. (knew it was coming) I agree. Sure an audiophile is the best if you have the $$$. I understand the processing of the signal, simulated surround and so forth. I was mearly pointing out that I DO hear other things stand out more on my setup. The receiver is an old ass Panasonic SA-HE200. Nothing great but does what I need it to do. It is in fact Pro logic II. I have 3-5 diff surround modes that do exactly what u say. Widens the sound and adds a reverb type of effect. When I set it to Dolby Pro Logic II music setting I get a more acurate stereo sound out of the mains and something totally different from the surrounds. It exagerates or emphasizes only certain intruments and vocals which makes things that are less audible stand out. It's really hard to explain it and I would not bother to bring it up if I was full of it. I know it's not true 5.1 or 7.1 or whatever but I enjoyed playing around with it hearing things upfront that are normally burried in the mix.

I still agree it's only a representation of the sound. not multi-channel.

Mindflux said:

tricky99 said:

You are missing the entire point. All that you say may be true (I'm no surround tech) but I don't think the original poster or I am argueing that we are getting a "true" reproduction of the music as it was intended by Prince or his sound engineer.

The manipulation of the sound allows you to hear in insolation parts of the music that are otherwise buried in the mix while also canceling out other parts. So you are hearing the song differently. Some song are more interesting than others. And some will sound like an alternate take of the song. Every Prince fan should try this. Its very fun and intersting.

I have also done this with classic Stevie Wonder and Marvin Gaye. It can give some songs a unplugged feeling while making others sound strange yet familar.

I fully understand what you are saying. And I'm not saying you shouldn't do it either. Its fun, as you say, and you will hear things you may not have picked up on before.

BUT, because its a simulation, some of what you hear may not actually be there. If a processor is simulating what it "thinks" should be there, then it is entirely likely that it is adding something that isn't there in the first place. I'm not saying your suddenly going to hear a guitar that was never there, but you may hear the sound soaked in reverb, or with a weird chorus, that isn't actually there. Its just the processor digitally processing the sound to make it like an actual surround track. The processor doesn't know that you want to hear an isolated part, its trying to emulate and surround track, which is usually an ambient effect.

Its cool though. As I said, I didn't say its wrong, just don't necessarily trust that what you are hearing is a detail you were always missing. It may just be a false interpretation of the original sound.

A "weird chorus"? It's not like an acid trip lol. I understand that if you play a song in surround and keep changing the surround presets the song sounds different. like more echo or deeper bass are something like that but that is not what I was talking about at all. i mean that say Prince layers his vocals on top of each other and you by canceling out the front speakers are left with a vocal that was underneath the main vocal. Or the bass line becomes more pronounced becaused the drums are gone. Or some whispered dialogue the was hardly audible because of some overlaying music suddenly becomes plain.

[Edited 6/29/12 11:04am]

tricky99 said:

Mindflux said:

I fully understand what you are saying. And I'm not saying you shouldn't do it either. Its fun, as you say, and you will hear things you may not have picked up on before.

BUT, because its a simulation, some of what you hear may not actually be there. If a processor is simulating what it "thinks" should be there, then it is entirely likely that it is adding something that isn't there in the first place. I'm not saying your suddenly going to hear a guitar that was never there, but you may hear the sound soaked in reverb, or with a weird chorus, that isn't actually there. Its just the processor digitally processing the sound to make it like an actual surround track. The processor doesn't know that you want to hear an isolated part, its trying to emulate and surround track, which is usually an ambient effect.

Its cool though. As I said, I didn't say its wrong, just don't necessarily trust that what you are hearing is a detail you were always missing. It may just be a false interpretation of the original sound.

A "weird chorus"? It's not like an acid trip lol. I understand that if you play a song in surround and keep changing the surround presets the song sounds different. like more echo or deeper bass are something like that but that is not what I was talking about at all. i mean that say Prince layers his vocals on top of each other and you by canceling out the front speakers are left with a vocal that was underneath the main vocal. Or the bass line becomes more pronounced becaused the drums are gone. Or some whispered dialogue the was hardly audible because of some overlaying music suddenly becomes plain.

[Edited 6/29/12 11:04am]

Its all good, as are weird chorus effects (and acid trips for that matter )

I wonder if you'd like my music - have you clicked my link?

SmiggyG said:

tricky99 said:

That

I appreciate the audiophile take on it. (knew it was coming) I agree. Sure an audiophile is the best if you have the $$$. I understand the processing of the signal, simulated surround and so forth. I was mearly pointing out that I DO hear other things stand out more on my setup. The receiver is an old ass Panasonic SA-HE200. Nothing great but does what I need it to do. It is in fact Pro logic II. I have 3-5 diff surround modes that do exactly what u say. Widens the sound and adds a reverb type of effect. When I set it to Dolby Pro Logic II music setting I get a more acurate stereo sound out of the mains and something totally different from the surrounds. It exagerates or emphasizes only certain intruments and vocals which makes things that are less audible stand out. It's really hard to explain it and I would not bother to bring it up if I was full of it. I know it's not true 5.1 or 7.1 or whatever but I enjoyed playing around with it hearing things upfront that are normally burried in the mix.

I still agree it's only a representation of the sound. not multi-channel.

Its all good mate. Please dont' take what I said as some form of admonishment - far from it, just observations. (as a music producer, I'm afraid I'm prone to getting anal about this sort of thing from time to time - but certainly not intending to take any of the fun out of such discoveries)

tricky99 said:

Mindflux said:

Its because the processor is artificially generating that sound channel from the source material. The channel doesn't exist, so the processor makes one up. Generally, this is acheived by a phase shift and delay. So, its not a genuine reproduction of the sound. Its taking elements and processing them to achieve a surround sound that isn't really there. Which is precisely why you don't hear them in "normal sound". The processor is simulating and also enhancing certain sounds to try and give that surround impression. Its false.Plug the fronts back in and that rear channel then just sounds like ambience. Take the fronts out (which is not right, they are the MAIN speakers in ANY set-up) and all your attention is on a false soundtrack, so it will sound like something you've not heard before. This will work on any unencoded stereo sound you feed to the processor.

If I removed Prince's vocal and just isolated the reverb, you would also say "I've never heard that sound before". But its not the full picture. Oil paintings get their colours by layering different colours over each other. A skin tone might have been started with a red colour (but could be anything, depending on what you want the final result to be). But, you wouldn't strip back the layers on the Mona Lisa and say "You know, I never realised she was red!". And the processor isn't even doing that - its taking an element of the music and then making up what it thinks should appear in the surround channel to add ambience.

Pro Logic is only Pro Logic when the music is deliberately encoded that way. None of Prince's albums are encoded in surround. Very few albums are. An excellent example of one though, is "Gaucho" by Steely Dan in full DTS. Lush, well thought out and purposefully done in surround.

You are missing the entire point. All that you say may be true (I'm no surround tech) but I don't think the original poster or I am argueing that we are getting a "true" reproduction of the music as it was intended by Prince or his sound engineer.

The manipulation of the sound allows you to hear in insolation parts of the music that are otherwise buried in the mix while also canceling out other parts. So you are hearing the song differently. Some song are more interesting than others. And some will sound like an alternate take of the song. Every Prince fan should try this. Its very fun and intersting.

^THIS.

I know exactly what he's talking about. I discovered this waaaayy back in the 80's with

a surround system and then later with Pro logic. Yes it artificially reassigns things and if

you isolate certain speakers and hear certain parts of certain songs that otherwise get

burried in the mix when listened to normally.

It kind of inverts the song so that more of the usual forground stuff is quieted and things usually burried under the mix are brought out.

If I Was Your Girlfriend was an awesome one to do this with. The layered low distorted back-up

vocals were suddenly right up front. You could even hear what sounds like a small vocal goof that they left in where he's going along singing the "If I Was Your Girlfriend, If I Was Your Girlfriend" back-ups and then one time he goes "If I..." and stops as if he realised just too late that it wasn't supposed to be there and they left it in. Now of course "If I.." could have been what he really intended to do there, but it doesn't repeat like that anywhere else in the song, and it does sound kind of like he goofed it and then just said fuck it leave it in there. It's something you'd never notice just listening to the song, but when put it in "fake surround" and having the rear speakers isolated, you can hear it plain as day.

in the extended remix of "i hate u" you can hear prince stating in the BG at 3:19:

"buy the black album, i need the money for more eyeliner"

"Madrid 2 Chicago"? damn it, I lost that years ago

NeonCraxx said:

tricky99 said:

tbag said:

In 17 Days, there's an extra funky bass thump right around the 2 minute mark that forces me to pull out my air bass guitar every time.

It's right between "...beg U 2 B near me. But I know..." **THUMP** "...your head is underwater. I doubt that you could hear me."

Wow was that always there?? Extra cool.

luvsexy4all said:

wTF is he saying at end of Future Souil Song????

i hear whispers etc...

Part of it, imo, is Prince responding to comments on the Org about him infusing Jehovah's Witness ideology into his song-writing and assertions that he was not playing certain songs because he was ashamed of his raunchy material.

EyeJester7 said:

AND since 'Madrid 2 Chicago is a lesser known track;

I love 'Madrid 2 Chicago' but it drives me crazy because I only have a version of it that lasts 1:24 mins. I want the full version. Wishful thinking...

Arabia25 said:

EyeJester7 said:

AND since 'Madrid 2 Chicago is a lesser known track;

I love 'Madrid 2 Chicago' but it drives me crazy because I only have a version of it that lasts 1:24 mins. I want the full version. Wishful thinking...

This is one of the reasons Prince is my favorite artist ever.

Even today, after 36 years of listening to his music, I can hear new things in almost any of his songs.

For that reason, I don't think his stuff will EVER get old to me. And that's why I call him a genius.