When you spell out the entire tittle of the Beatles 7th studio album, it really spells out how "cute" it is doesn't it? Hyper-precious and pretentious. Sir Paul's presence looms large over it. Like if he shat potpourri all over it. But in a good way.

The cover is cool too I guess. I've never been so hot for it myself though. It's iconic, is the best I can say for it. And that's enough really. Ok, I'll say it, it's gaudy.

The album's centerpiece "A Day In The Life" MAKES this album the precious jewel that it is. It's just utterly AMAZING!

It's sophisticated, original, avant-garde, yet accessible and even singable.

See an influence? The flowers, the stage for a "band" the guitar on the floor.

NOW

If we were talking about this album

I wouldn't even be talking. I'd keep my mouth shut. The whole thing is amazing. Heck, even the cover is better. (it features cutouts too)

But no, this is a face-off between Sgt. Pepper and SOTT.

If we are going to compare Prince to the Beatles, in a way Parade is kinda sorta Prince's Revolver in that it foreshadows what is to come.

While Parade is arguably Prince's most sophisticated album, Revolver still tears it apart. It is above and beyond better than both Parade and Pepper.

Taxman

Elenor Rigby

I'm Only Sleeping

Here There And Everywhere

Yellow Submarine

She Said She Said

Good Day Sunshine

And Your Bird Can Sing

For No One

Got To Get You Into My Life

Tommorow Never Knows!!

Almost every single track is holy shit fantastic. Every track is genius on another level.

Parade is genius too, but in no way on this level. No way, no how.

I'd say Sgt. Pepper's status in pop is critics and pop journalist finally admitting how great these fuckers were and an overdue reaction to how great Revolver was. But pretty colors on the cover with pirates helped too though, let's face it. Pop journalists love pretty colors and pirates.

But if we compare Sgt Pepper's to Sign O' The Times, that's a different story.

Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band is a great album no doubt. Genius. But really? Who ever just puts on the tittle track? I mean to listen to?

All the songs are great, but I don't know, I personally rarely ever feel I need my fix of hearing the genius of "She's Leaving Home" or "Lovely Rita," I love these songs, "Fixing a Hole" is awesome, but it's like sonic diabetes. Delicious cotton candy. When I'm Sixty-Four. The cutesy noises, moans and huff huff throughout the album are too much sometimes.



But again, to me what makes Sgt Peppers hard to beat, what makes Sgt Peppers what it is, The MASTERPIECE as we say here on the org, is A Day In The Life. Like I said earlier, it is just sublime. I can't say enough good about this track. How can you stack any album against an album that contains the original wonder that someone dreamed up one day in A Day In The Life?

On the other hand, if we boot that particular track from Peppers..Then oh yeah, easy, Sign of The Times beats the crap out of Peppers. It kicks it's ass all the way to the other end of Abbey Road.

Furthermore,

if we we lay out Sign the way Prince originally intended it, the three disk monstrosity that he wanted, with all these raw tracks ganging up on A Day in The Life, well that's a different story. While Sign the way it is, is elegant and almost antiseptic and clinical in places, imagine the rawness of these tracks also included! And by sheer force, It would be one of the greatest works of pop rock ever created.

Rebirth Of The Flesh

Crystal Ball

Rockhard In A Funky Place

Joy In Repitition

Shockadelica

Good Love

Crystal Ball! Shockadelica, Rebirth, Rock Hard included on Sign? Makes Peppers come off like a children's album doesn't it?

At the time, it was said Prince was not all too happy with his record label Warner Brothers for their decision to pair down his three disk masterpiece to two disks instead of the three. it was said he was quite upset. Some said it may have even driven him mad. Whatever the case, he has not been the same since.





But would I rate that iteration of SOTT higher than Revolver? Oh man that's a hard one. I think I would have to do that thing we do here in the US, ..when they don't show up on the day of the difficult vote, where they line congressmen's pockets with money to vote a certain way, where they filibuster so no vote is taken, what that called? Oh yeah Democracy. I would use democracy if I had to make that choice.

[Edited 7/21/13 9:27am]

[Edited 7/23/13 20:01pm]

Being that the beatles obviously influenced Prince, it's easy to see similarities.


However, Prince dwarfs the beatles in scope, scale, and depth of his songs. I ain't even lyin', and I love the beatles.

[Edited 7/21/13 11:44am]

Yeah, the more I think of it, I think SOTT the way Prince originally intended would be the greatest pop rock document ever created. Really. And I think that's the real reason he went mad and wrote slave on his face, jughead and Box of Chocolates. What WB did to him must have been traumatic. I don't blame him. .

Isn't it funny how time has proven Prince right? Those songs now seem like missing pieces. Like the album is not complete. It needed the rawness to balance it out. However great SOTT is, we all now know something is missing from it. Those incredible tracks have just been living in the ether ever since. The concept was epic but no one but Prince at that time could have pulled it off. And he did.

Maybe if he ever get's his masters back he could make things right on it once and for all.

[Edited 7/21/13 10:17am]

V10LETBLUES said:

Yeah, the more I think of it, I think SOTT the way Prince originally intended would be the greatest pop rock document ever created. Really. And I think that's the real reason he went mad and wrote slave on his face, jughead and Box of Chocolates. What WB did to him must have been traumatic. I don't blame him. .

Isn't it funny how time has proven Prince right? Those songs now seem like missing pieces. Like the album is not complete. It needed the rawness to balance it out. However great SOTT is, we all now know something is missing from it. Those incredible tracks have just been living in the ether ever since. The concept was epic but no one but Prince at that time could have pulled it off. And he did.

Maybe if he ever get's his masters back he could make things right on it once and for all.

[Edited 7/21/13 10:17am]

You know, I'm gonna have to say nay here. I love the "missing tracks" but I just don't really think a three disc "real Crystal Ball" would have been that great. It would have been too much. The songs wouldn't have had the opportunity to really been heard. Or, really, the "raw" songs would have sounded out of place. Camille would have been a great album. Camille scattered through Sign o the Times? A mess.

And no--probably no one would ever listen to the opening track of Sgt. Pepper's by itself. But you weren't intended to--it's an intro. It only works in the context of the album--and not just because it ends by introducing "Billy Shears" singing "With a Little Help From My Friends."

Prince albums better than Sgt. Pepper's? Lots of them. Prince albums as important as Sgt. Peppers? Not a one. Beatles albums better than Sgt. Pepper's? Not lots ('cuz there aren't lots of Beatles albums), but at least Rubber Soul, Revolver, the White Album, Abbey Road--and I might argue for others on some days. But again--there isn't one more important. Whether that's as it should be, I don't know. But the cultural impact (even at the time, it felt like it mattered) seems pretty undeniable.

V10LETBLUES said:

Yeah, the more I think of it, I think SOTT the way Prince originally intended would be the greatest pop rock document ever created. Really. And I think that's the real reason he went mad and wrote slave on his face, jughead and Box of Chocolates. What WB did to him must have been traumatic. I don't blame him. .

Isn't it funny how time has proven Prince right? Those songs now seem like missing pieces. Like the album is not complete. It needed the rawness to balance it out. However great SOTT is, we all now know something is missing from it. Those incredible tracks have just been living in the ether ever since. The concept was epic but no one but Prince at that time could have pulled it off. And he did.

Maybe if he ever get's his masters back he could make things right on it once and for all.

[Edited 7/21/13 10:17am]

Nope. We'd get curse-free Doug E. Fresh remixes.

imago said:

V10LETBLUES said:

Yeah, the more I think of it, I think SOTT the way Prince originally intended would be the greatest pop rock document ever created. Really. And I think that's the real reason he went mad and wrote slave on his face, jughead and Box of Chocolates. What WB did to him must have been traumatic. I don't blame him. .

Isn't it funny how time has proven Prince right? Those songs now seem like missing pieces. Like the album is not complete. It needed the rawness to balance it out. However great SOTT is, we all now know something is missing from it. Those incredible tracks have just been living in the ether ever since. The concept was epic but no one but Prince at that time could have pulled it off. And he did.

Maybe if he ever get's his masters back he could make things right on it once and for all.

[Edited 7/21/13 10:17am]

Nope. We'd get curse-free Doug E. Fresh remixes.

I just watched The People vs. George Lucas--the whole dynamic is very much what seems to be going on here a lot. And I'm pretty sure that if Prince ever does anything with the Warner albums, the fan response will be pretty much what the response was to the Special Editions of the Star Wars films (because, like Lucas, Prince ain't just gonna clean up/restore or add supplemental material--he's gonna change pretty basic stuff, and, if he can, eliminate the original "flawed" version). I'm not quite sure what the "Han Shot First" controversy equivalent would be, but I know I don't really want to find out.

imago said:

imago said:

That's way too easy-of course Prince.

But the real comparison is Prince's Sign O the Times and Stevie Wonder's songs in the key of life. Talk about sophie's choice!

I like the White Album the most

I can see/hear the faint influences of the Beatles on Around the World in a Day and, maybe, Parade, but not Sign "O" the Times. Sign "O" the Times is way too funky to be reflective of anything that the Beatles ever did. And even if we mention something like "Get Back," the driving groove or rhythm of "Get Back" was created by Billy Preston. Yes, Sign "O" the Times is experimental, but so is Stevie Wonder's Secret Life of Plants so the experimental nature/tone of Sign "O" the Times does not seem to be enough, for me, to accept that the Beatles' work was the primary or driving influence for it.

V10LETBLUES said:

imago said:

Nope. We'd get curse-free Doug E. Fresh remixes.

good point

When he gets them back, he's the one holding things up.

1725topp said:

I can see/hear the faint influences of the Beatles on Around the World in a Day and, maybe, Parade, but not Sign "O" the Times. Sign "O" the Times is way too funky to be reflective of anything that the Beatles ever did. And even if we mention something like "Get Back," the driving groove or rhythm of "Get Back" was created by Billy Preston. Yes, Sign "O" the Times is experimental, but so is Stevie Wonder's Secret Life of Plants so the experimental nature/tone of Sign "O" the Times does not seem to be enough, for me, to accept that the Beatles' work was the primary or driving influence for it.

In my opinion, the Beatles' influence may be faint on Parade, but it's considerable on Around The World In A Day. It can also be heard on Sign O' The Times, particularly on "Starfish And Coffee" and "I Could Never Take The Place Of Your Man".

I often find a tendency to diminish the relevance of the poppier/whiter influences on Prince. This is also the case with electro-pop. Rarely do I find Gary Numan or other British electro-pop musicians of the end of the 70's-early 80's mentioned when discussing Prince's influences. It seems that everything is James Brown and Sly & The Family Stone, whereas Prince himself has tried not to be pigeonholed as just another soul/funk musician during most of his career.

[Edited 7/22/13 2:28am]

Javi said:

1725topp said:

I can see/hear the faint influences of the Beatles on Around the World in a Day and, maybe, Parade, but not Sign "O" the Times. Sign "O" the Times is way too funky to be reflective of anything that the Beatles ever did. And even if we mention something like "Get Back," the driving groove or rhythm of "Get Back" was created by Billy Preston. Yes, Sign "O" the Times is experimental, but so is Stevie Wonder's Secret Life of Plants so the experimental nature/tone of Sign "O" the Times does not seem to be enough, for me, to accept that the Beatles' work was the primary or driving influence for it.

In my opinion, the Beatles' influence may be faint on Parade, but it's considerable on Around The World In A Day. It can also be heard on Sign O' The Times, particularly on "Starfish And Coffee" and "I Could Never Take The Place Of Your Man".

I often find a tendency to diminish the relevance of the poppier/whiter influences on Prince. This is also the case with electro-pop. Rarely do I find Gary Numan or other British electro-pop musicians of the end of the 70's-early 80's mentioned when discussing Prince's influences. It seems that everything is James Brown and Sly & The Family Stone, whereas Prince himself has tried not to be pigeonholed as just another soul/funk musician during most of his career.

[Edited 7/22/13 2:28am]

*

And in my opinion, I'm not trying to pigeonhole Prince. If you've ever checked any of my posts, including my love for what's been happening in 2013, I've been constant in my love for Prince's range and diversity, which includes being one of the few--if not only--current artists who can fill a setlist with songs, such as "Endorphinemachine," "Screwdriver," and "I Like it There," and with songs, such as "Adore," "Satisfied," and "Ain't Gone Miss U." However, I find the tendency to "over-reach" and give "too much credit" to people like The Beatles and Gary Numan equally as flawed as you find what you see as a tendency to diminish their influence on them. Also, "I Could Never Take the Place of Your Man" is a rock song, period. Are you asserting that The Beatles invented rock? Are you forgetting that The Beatles’ first couple of albums included covers of black rockers, such as Little Richard? To state that "I Could Never Take the Place of Your Man" is inspired by The Beatles or any other white rock act is like saying that Jackie Wilson wanted to be Elvis Presley. Yes, Wilson wanted the fame of Presley, but all of Presley’s moves and vocal techniques were influenced by black men and women that Wilson already knew. As for whether or not "Starfish and Coffee" was influenced by The Beatles, that's debatable. Black acts had merged rock and soul and had highly symbolic lyrical content before The Beatles. But, even if it is, it doesn't prove that the entire Sign "O" the Times project was influenced by The Beatles. I mean, what influence would they have had on "It," "Hot Thang," "Slow Love," "U Got the Look," and even "Forever in my Life," unless you are saying that no black people had ever done songs like these before The Beatles? Yes, Prince likes The Beatles; no one is denying that. But, to make them a primary influence on his artistry is just flawed, in my opinion.

Angelix said:

imago said:

Being that the beatles obviously influenced Prince, it's easy to see similarities.


However, Prince dwarfs the beatles in scope, scale, and depth of his songs. I ain't even lyin', and I love the beatles.

[Edited 7/21/13 11:44am]

Agreed.

Disagreed.

1725topp said:

Javi said:

In my opinion, the Beatles' influence may be faint on Parade, but it's considerable on Around The World In A Day. It can also be heard on Sign O' The Times, particularly on "Starfish And Coffee" and "I Could Never Take The Place Of Your Man".

I often find a tendency to diminish the relevance of the poppier/whiter influences on Prince. This is also the case with electro-pop. Rarely do I find Gary Numan or other British electro-pop musicians of the end of the 70's-early 80's mentioned when discussing Prince's influences. It seems that everything is James Brown and Sly & The Family Stone, whereas Prince himself has tried not to be pigeonholed as just another soul/funk musician during most of his career.

[Edited 7/22/13 2:28am]

*

And in my opinion, I'm not trying to pigeonhole Prince. If you've ever checked any of my posts, including my love for what's been happening in 2013, I've been constant in my love for Prince's range and diversity, which includes being one of the few--if not only--current artists who can fill a setlist with songs, such as "Endorphinemachine," "Screwdriver," and "I Like it There," and with songs, such as "Adore," "Satisfied," and "Ain't Gone Miss U." However, I find the tendency to "over-reach" and give "too much credit" to people like The Beatles and Gary Numan equally as flawed as you find what you see as a tendency to diminish their influence on them. Also, "I Could Never Take the Place of Your Man" is a rock song, period. Are you asserting that The Beatles invented rock? Are you forgetting that The Beatles’ first couple of albums included covers of black rockers, such as Little Richard? To state that "I Could Never Take the Place of Your Man" is inspired by The Beatles or any other white rock act is like saying that Jackie Wilson wanted to be Elvis Presley. Yes, Wilson wanted the fame of Presley, but all of Presley’s moves and vocal techniques were influenced by black men and women that Wilson already knew. As for whether or not "Starfish and Coffee" was influenced by The Beatles, that's debatable. Black acts had merged rock and soul and had highly symbolic lyrical content before The Beatles. But, even if it is, it doesn't prove that the entire Sign "O" the Times project was influenced by The Beatles. I mean, what influence would they have had on "It," "Hot Thang," "Slow Love," "U Got the Look," and even "Forever in my Life," unless you are saying that no black people had ever done songs like these before The Beatles? Yes, Prince likes The Beatles; no one is denying that. But, to make them a primary influence on his artistry is just flawed, in my opinion.

I'm not denying that Prince likes the Beatles--but I will say I have no reason to believe he does. I doubt that the Beatles are particularly significant for him, and I don't see much specifically Beatles-influenced in anything he ever did. Period. A touch of psychedelic references? Heck, he's as likely to have picked it up from bubblegum singles like "Green Tamborine" or the like. Yes, he's influenced by "white music"--but there's a heck of a lot more there than the Beatles. And you don't have to be influenced by great artists to make great art. You can do that even if your influences were all hacks. He heard whatever was on the radio in the early seventies in Minneapolis (which from what I understand was basically white radio), added a few things from the record collections of some people around him, and that's what he built his stuff from. So, yeah, there's Beatles influence there--but I think it's mostly indirect, from people influenced by the Beatles before him, or, God forbid, from McCartney solo/Wings material. I just can't imagine that little 9-year-old Skipper spent any time studying "Sgt. Pepper." I'm not saying he never heard them (though if I remember right, he said he didn't know "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" before the Hall of Fame thing came up--so how seriously can we take his Beatles' cred?)--but as a band that was done before he reached his teens, in a pop world that hadn't yet started creating its canonical figures--he listened to what was hot then, and built from there. And I doubt he's ever gone back and learned much since then--certainly not beyond being able to take a Beatles song and do a serviceable version of it. He was beyond the point where they could be a natural and significant influence on much of anything.

1725topp said:

Javi said:

In my opinion, the Beatles' influence may be faint on Parade, but it's considerable on Around The World In A Day. It can also be heard on Sign O' The Times, particularly on "Starfish And Coffee" and "I Could Never Take The Place Of Your Man".

I often find a tendency to diminish the relevance of the poppier/whiter influences on Prince. This is also the case with electro-pop. Rarely do I find Gary Numan or other British electro-pop musicians of the end of the 70's-early 80's mentioned when discussing Prince's influences. It seems that everything is James Brown and Sly & The Family Stone, whereas Prince himself has tried not to be pigeonholed as just another soul/funk musician during most of his career.

[Edited 7/22/13 2:28am]

*

And in my opinion, I'm not trying to pigeonhole Prince. If you've ever checked any of my posts, including my love for what's been happening in 2013, I've been constant in my love for Prince's range and diversity, which includes being one of the few--if not only--current artists who can fill a setlist with songs, such as "Endorphinemachine," "Screwdriver," and "I Like it There," and with songs, such as "Adore," "Satisfied," and "Ain't Gone Miss U." However, I find the tendency to "over-reach" and give "too much credit" to people like The Beatles and Gary Numan equally as flawed as you find what you see as a tendency to diminish their influence on them. Also, "I Could Never Take the Place of Your Man" is a rock song, period. Are you asserting that The Beatles invented rock? Are you forgetting that The Beatles’ first couple of albums included covers of black rockers, such as Little Richard? To state that "I Could Never Take the Place of Your Man" is inspired by The Beatles or any other white rock act is like saying that Jackie Wilson wanted to be Elvis Presley. Yes, Wilson wanted the fame of Presley, but all of Presley’s moves and vocal techniques were influenced by black men and women that Wilson already knew. As for whether or not "Starfish and Coffee" was influenced by The Beatles, that's debatable. Black acts had merged rock and soul and had highly symbolic lyrical content before The Beatles. But, even if it is, it doesn't prove that the entire Sign "O" the Times project was influenced by The Beatles. I mean, what influence would they have had on "It," "Hot Thang," "Slow Love," "U Got the Look," and even "Forever in my Life," unless you are saying that no black people had ever done songs like these before The Beatles? Yes, Prince likes The Beatles; no one is denying that. But, to make them a primary influence on his artistry is just flawed, in my opinion.

I wouldn't say that The Beatles are a primary influence on Prince's work in general, but I'd definitely say that they are the primary influence on Around The World In A Day. What moved me to write my post was the adjective you used to define the influence of The Beatles on Around...: faint. It surprised me, since I see they are the main influence on half of the record and also on the artwork, on Prince's image back then, etc. If you consider other of his albums, The Beatles' influence is never primary, but can be seen here and there.

-------

Of course: the British Invasion's groups were highly influenced by black rockers. That applies not only to The Beatles, but also to The Rolling Stones, The Kinks, The Who or even David Bowie. But they gradually developed their sound until they found themselves doing something very different in the psychodelic second half of the 60's. And I can't help but see that "I Could Never Take The Place Of Your Man" has the British Invasion's stamp all over it, that it's a kind of reading of the British Invasion's reading of black rock and roll...

-------

Regarding the Gary Numan/electropop influence, I think it was very relevant in the development of the "Minneapolis sound" of the early 80's. It amazes me how several songs on 1999 have a clear Kraftwerk mark on them. And I don't see this mentioned very often, to be honest. Also, let's remember how the Human League crossed with Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis' path on the album Crash. Prince had an eye on what was happening on the other side of the Atlantic, on Numan, John Foxx, Duran Duran... When he conceived The Family, he said that he wanted to get all that Duran Duran money with his new band...

-------

The point of the rest of my post is that Prince, though mainly placed in the soul/funk traditions, has always tried to incorporate other genres, and that is what has made him special for many people. I love soul and funk, but I'll always be amazed by Prince's proficiency with other styles. For example: if you ask me, I think Prince is one of the best pop composers of the 80's. "Manic Monday" is pure pop perfection to my ears, as are "Raspberry Beret", "Paisley Park" or "Desire".

[Edited 7/22/13 13:40pm]

[Edited 7/22/13 13:41pm]

Javi said:

1725topp said:

*

And in my opinion, I'm not trying to pigeonhole Prince. If you've ever checked any of my posts, including my love for what's been happening in 2013, I've been constant in my love for Prince's range and diversity, which includes being one of the few--if not only--current artists who can fill a setlist with songs, such as "Endorphinemachine," "Screwdriver," and "I Like it There," and with songs, such as "Adore," "Satisfied," and "Ain't Gone Miss U." However, I find the tendency to "over-reach" and give "too much credit" to people like The Beatles and Gary Numan equally as flawed as you find what you see as a tendency to diminish their influence on them. Also, "I Could Never Take the Place of Your Man" is a rock song, period. Are you asserting that The Beatles invented rock? Are you forgetting that The Beatles’ first couple of albums included covers of black rockers, such as Little Richard? To state that "I Could Never Take the Place of Your Man" is inspired by The Beatles or any other white rock act is like saying that Jackie Wilson wanted to be Elvis Presley. Yes, Wilson wanted the fame of Presley, but all of Presley’s moves and vocal techniques were influenced by black men and women that Wilson already knew. As for whether or not "Starfish and Coffee" was influenced by The Beatles, that's debatable. Black acts had merged rock and soul and had highly symbolic lyrical content before The Beatles. But, even if it is, it doesn't prove that the entire Sign "O" the Times project was influenced by The Beatles. I mean, what influence would they have had on "It," "Hot Thang," "Slow Love," "U Got the Look," and even "Forever in my Life," unless you are saying that no black people had ever done songs like these before The Beatles? Yes, Prince likes The Beatles; no one is denying that. But, to make them a primary influence on his artistry is just flawed, in my opinion.

I wouldn't say that The Beatles are a primary influence on Prince's work in general, but I'd definitely say that they are the primary influence on Around The World In A Day. What moved me to write my post was the adjective you used to define the influence of The Beatles on Around...: faint. It surprised me, since I see they are the main influence on half of the record and also on the artwork, on Prince's image back then, etc. If you consider other of his albums, The Beatles' influence is never primary, but can be seen here and there.

-------

Of course: the British Invasion's groups were highly influenced by black rockers. That applies not only to The Beatles, but also to The Rolling Stones, The Kinks, The Who or even David Bowie. But they gradually developed their sound until they found themselves doing something very different in the psychodelic second half of the 60's. And I can't help but see that "I Could Never Take The Place Of Your Man" has the British Invasion's stamp all over it, that it's a kind of reading of the British Invasion's reading of black rock and roll...

-------

Regarding the Gary Numan/electropop influence, I think it was very relevant in the development of the "Minneapolis sound" of the early 80's. It amazes me how several songs on 1999 have a clear Kraftwerk mark on them. And I don't see this mentioned very often, to be honest. Also, let's remember how the Human League crossed with Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis' path on the album Crash. Prince had an eye on what was happening on the other side of the Atlantic, on Numan, John Foxx, Duran Duran... When he conceived The Family, he said that he wanted to get all that Duran Duran money with his new band...

-------

The point of the rest of my post is that Prince, though mainly placed in the soul/funk traditions, has always tried to incorporate other genres, and that is what has made him special for many people. I love soul and funk, but I'll always be amazed by Prince's proficiency with other styles. For example: if you ask me, I think Prince is one of the best pop composers of the 80's. "Manic Monday" is pure pop perfection to my ears, as are "Raspberry Beret", "Paisley Park" or "Desire".

[Edited 7/22/13 13:40pm]

[Edited 7/22/13 13:41pm]

*

Of course, my goal is not to diminish the greatness of The Beatles, but while I've heard The Beatles influence on Around the World in a Day their influence has never sounded as prominent to me as it does to others. I hear James Brown with "Tamborine," because The Beatles never had drums that funky, I hear Jimi Hendrix with "Temptation," I hear straight gospel with "The Ladder," I hear rock/funk fusion with "America," especially live as it morphs into the vein of Funkadelic's "Who Says a Funk Band Can't Play Rock," I hear more Sly and the Family Stone with "Pop Life," and granted I do hear The Beatles influence in "Around the World in a Day," "Paisley Park," "Condition of the Heart," and "Raspberry Beret," but there is also such a funk sensibility in all but "Condition of the Heart" that it seems like an attempt of Prince to do for Psychedelic sound what Ray Charles did for Country, which is to show where the "blackness" or "soul" or "funk" of the form/genre lies within the essence of the music.

*

We'll just have to disagree about "I Could never Take the Place of your Man." I get what you are saying about Prince's "reading of the British Invasion's reading of black rock-n-roll," but it just sounds more like good ole American rock-n-roll to me. But the greatness of Prince is that he amalgamates so many different sounds so well that his music is like a gumbo or soup in that listeners often hear different sounds/flavors, depending on or according to their ears/palate.

*

I don't doubt that Prince had his eye on the other side of the Atlantic, but in America there was already a pretty well-established history and blueprint of white acts selling mass amounts of units performing "black" music, which predates European acts doing the same. However, the Minneapolis Sound, like most sounds developing between 1976/7 and 1982, probably owes its development as much to the lowered cost of the synthesizer and drum machine as to anything. Of course, the success gained by people using this technology inspired others to use them, but the lowered cost of the new technology allowed even more young musicians to become three, two, and one-man bands.

*

And, I don't disagree that Prince is one of the best pop composers of the 1980s because of his love for so many different sounds and his ability to amalgamate them into his own thing, whatever we call it. Maybe we just hear it differently and should just be glad that we do hear it.

Take a look at the cover of Peppers, and how many of the cutout figures placed around it can you name? This was 1967. These are all famous and notable people. Lennon wanted Jesus and Hitler on the cover but were left off because of business and celebrity politics. Most of the notables were easily identifiable to people at the time. How many can you identify today?

No one is questioning the "importance" of Sgt Peppers. Pepper's importance is marked by much more than the merit of the music, but by it's impact at the time, and pop culture in general. I merely question some people's myopia in the belief that what is important today to you will always be that way. The sands of time tend to wash away or obscure but the greatest landmarks. This is why I find some people's preoccupation and distress about Prince appearing on YouTube so humorous. A running myopia that says because "today's kids" don't know much about Prince, or because he is not on YouTube that it somehow diminishes him. Like saying because today's kids don't know about that Miles Davis or Gershwin it will diminish them or erase them. Heck, will YouTube be around 20 years from now? I'm sure Prince's music will. I don't know about YouTube.

What matters more is a time's respected contemporary artists and the views of the more notable and educated voices. They advocate with music and words, "what" and "who" really matters. What really matters to them. As they say, we all stand on the shoulders of what's come before. In 1987 Prince stood on the shoulders of the Beatles of 1967.

This is not about importance, but more so about the effects of the sands of time and how landmarks look from that perspective. Mine at least.

[Edited 7/23/13 20:19pm]

1725topp said:

Javi said:

I wouldn't say that The Beatles are a primary influence on Prince's work in general, but I'd definitely say that they are the primary influence on Around The World In A Day. What moved me to write my post was the adjective you used to define the influence of The Beatles on Around...: faint. It surprised me, since I see they are the main influence on half of the record and also on the artwork, on Prince's image back then, etc. If you consider other of his albums, The Beatles' influence is never primary, but can be seen here and there.

-------

Of course: the British Invasion's groups were highly influenced by black rockers. That applies not only to The Beatles, but also to The Rolling Stones, The Kinks, The Who or even David Bowie. But they gradually developed their sound until they found themselves doing something very different in the psychodelic second half of the 60's. And I can't help but see that "I Could Never Take The Place Of Your Man" has the British Invasion's stamp all over it, that it's a kind of reading of the British Invasion's reading of black rock and roll...

-------

Regarding the Gary Numan/electropop influence, I think it was very relevant in the development of the "Minneapolis sound" of the early 80's. It amazes me how several songs on 1999 have a clear Kraftwerk mark on them. And I don't see this mentioned very often, to be honest. Also, let's remember how the Human League crossed with Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis' path on the album Crash. Prince had an eye on what was happening on the other side of the Atlantic, on Numan, John Foxx, Duran Duran... When he conceived The Family, he said that he wanted to get all that Duran Duran money with his new band...

-------

The point of the rest of my post is that Prince, though mainly placed in the soul/funk traditions, has always tried to incorporate other genres, and that is what has made him special for many people. I love soul and funk, but I'll always be amazed by Prince's proficiency with other styles. For example: if you ask me, I think Prince is one of the best pop composers of the 80's. "Manic Monday" is pure pop perfection to my ears, as are "Raspberry Beret", "Paisley Park" or "Desire".

[Edited 7/22/13 13:40pm]

[Edited 7/22/13 13:41pm]

*

Of course, my goal is not to diminish the greatness of The Beatles, but while I've heard The Beatles influence on Around the World in a Day their influence has never sounded as prominent to me as it does to others. I hear James Brown with "Tamborine," because The Beatles never had drums that funky, I hear Jimi Hendrix with "Temptation," I hear straight gospel with "The Ladder," I hear rock/funk fusion with "America," especially live as it morphs into the vein of Funkadelic's "Who Says a Funk Band Can't Play Rock," I hear more Sly and the Family Stone with "Pop Life," and granted I do hear The Beatles influence in "Around the World in a Day," "Paisley Park," "Condition of the Heart," and "Raspberry Beret," but there is also such a funk sensibility in all but "Condition of the Heart" that it seems like an attempt of Prince to do for Psychedelic sound what Ray Charles did for Country, which is to show where the "blackness" or "soul" or "funk" of the form/genre lies within the essence of the music.

*

We'll just have to disagree about "I Could never Take the Place of your Man." I get what you are saying about Prince's "reading of the British Invasion's reading of black rock-n-roll," but it just sounds more like good ole American rock-n-roll to me. But the greatness of Prince is that he amalgamates so many different sounds so well that his music is like a gumbo or soup in that listeners often hear different sounds/flavors, depending on or according to their ears/palate.

*

I don't doubt that Prince had his eye on the other side of the Atlantic, but in America there was already a pretty well-established history and blueprint of white acts selling mass amounts of units performing "black" music, which predates European acts doing the same. However, the Minneapolis Sound, like most sounds developing between 1976/7 and 1982, probably owes its development as much to the lowered cost of the synthesizer and drum machine as to anything. Of course, the success gained by people using this technology inspired others to use them, but the lowered cost of the new technology allowed even more young musicians to become three, two, and one-man bands.

*

And, I don't disagree that Prince is one of the best pop composers of the 1980s because of his love for so many different sounds and his ability to amalgamate them into his own thing, whatever we call it. Maybe we just hear it differently and should just be glad that we do hear it.

Definitely. Prince's music, and I would say that his whole persona, is so many-sided that is open to very diverse interpretations, and very different people can identify at least with some of his music. That's his richness.

Sign "O" The Times :

Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band:


Both are sooo amazing :

You know I have been listening to the missing tracks a lot lately and BOY have the aged great. They transcend time. Rebirth of The Flesh I think is more palatable today than it would have at the time. They ooze energy. Shockadelica, Rock Hard, they are all non-time specific tracks that do not in any way betray it's age other than betray who the artist is. They do not betray time because they did not ever fit any genre or trend other than the one Prince created. These are PRINCE tracks. These live in their own space and time.

Notice how on the intended Crystal Ball configuration, the omitted tracks OPENED four sides of the planned records. They are that good.

[Edited 7/23/13 10:22am]

V10LETBLUES said:

You know I have been listening to missing tracks a lot lately and BOY have the aged great. They transcend time. Rebirth of The Flesh I think is more palatable today than it would have at the time. They ooze energy. Shockadelica, Rock Hard, there are all non-time specific tracks that do not in any way betray it's age other than betray who the artist is. The do not betray time because they did not ever fit any genre or trend other than the one Prince created. These are PRINCE tracks. These live in their own space and time.

Both are incredibly amazing, among my favorite albums. As much as I love The Beatles, and I think I may love them a tiny bit more than Prince this definitely has to go to Sign o' the Times. I just listened to it a few weeks ago after not having heard it in a year and it was just a wonderful experience, I felt like I lived in the world of that album, it was like watching a great film or reading a great book, and it really reminded me that popular music could be as immersive as classical music. I just feel like every song works perfectly, and the lyrics really stand-out as Prince's best as well. I like how some of the songs are a bit minimal too like Forever In My Life.

Sgt. Pepper's does this as well but I really need to be in the mood for it, as I prefer other Beatles' albums such as Revolver, Rubber Soul, The Beatles, Abbey Road, and hell I play A Hard Day's Night (their most underrated album IMO) more than Sgt. Pepper's. I disagree with people who say the individual tracks don't stand out, compared to other Beatles albums sure but if you compare the individual tracks on that album with any other Pop/Rock act well it'll be hard finding better tracks than the title track, Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds, She's Leaving Home, Within You Without You (underrated), A Day In The Life, or even Getting Better. This album is important because more than any album it showed the world that popular music IS an art, and can reach great musical heights. The instrumentation, packaging, studio techniques, instrumentation, and of course the wonderful Lennon/McCartney (and Harrison) songwriting make this an essential album.

Both great albums, and I'm so thankful that both of them exist and that I have had the opportunity to listen to them both.

MiniJamesW said:

Both are incredibly amazing, among my favorite albums. As much as I love The Beatles, and I think I may love them a tiny bit more than Prince this definitely has to go to Sign o' the Times. I just listened to it a few weeks ago after not having heard it in a year and it was just a wonderful experience, I felt like I lived in the world of that album, it was like watching a great film or reading a great book, and it really reminded me that popular music could be as immersive as classical music. I just feel like every song works perfectly, and the lyrics really stand-out as Prince's best as well. I like how some of the songs are a bit minimal too like Forever In My Life.

Sgt. Pepper's does this as well but I really need to be in the mood for it, as I prefer other Beatles' albums such as Revolver, Rubber Soul, The Beatles, Abbey Road, and hell I play A Hard Day's Night (their most underrated album IMO) more than Sgt. Pepper's. I disagree with people who say the individual tracks don't stand out, compared to other Beatles albums sure but if you compare the individual tracks on that album with any other Pop/Rock act well it'll be hard finding better tracks than the title track, Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds, She's Leaving Home, Within You Without You (underrated), A Day In The Life, or even Getting Better. This album is important because more than any album it showed the world that popular music IS an art, and can reach great musical heights. The instrumentation, packaging, studio techniques, instrumentation, and of course the wonderful Lennon/McCartney (and Harrison) songwriting make this an essential album.

Both great albums, and I'm so thankful that both of them exist and that I have had the opportunity to listen to them both.

Actually, I find myself singing/humming "Within You Without You" more than anything else on the album. Getting Better is probably second.

MiniJamesW said:

Both are incredibly amazing, among my favorite albums. As much as I love The Beatles, and I think I may love them a tiny bit more than Prince this definitely has to go to Sign o' the Times. I just listened to it a few weeks ago after not having heard it in a year and it was just a wonderful experience, I felt like I lived in the world of that album, it was like watching a great film or reading a great book, and it really reminded me that popular music could be as immersive as classical music. I just feel like every song works perfectly, and the lyrics really stand-out as Prince's best as well. I like how some of the songs are a bit minimal too like Forever In My Life.

Sgt. Pepper's does this as well but I really need to be in the mood for it, as I prefer other Beatles' albums such as Revolver, Rubber Soul, The Beatles, Abbey Road, and hell I play A Hard Day's Night (their most underrated album IMO) more than Sgt. Pepper's. I disagree with people who say the individual tracks don't stand out, compared to other Beatles albums sure but if you compare the individual tracks on that album with any other Pop/Rock act well it'll be hard finding better tracks than the title track, Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds, She's Leaving Home, Within You Without You (underrated), A Day In The Life, or even Getting Better. This album is important because more than any album it showed the world that popular music IS an art, and can reach great musical heights. The instrumentation, packaging, studio techniques, instrumentation, and of course the wonderful Lennon/McCartney (and Harrison) songwriting make this an essential album.

Both great albums, and I'm so thankful that both of them exist and that I have had the opportunity to listen to them both.

great post. I agree.

Although Prince claimed "The influence wasn't the Beatles," The Revolution band members admitted that the Beatles were an influence on Around the World in a Day.

I suspect Jimi's Electric Ladyland and Axis: Bold as Love had an influence on the album and cover art as well.

Parade musically was influenced by Duke Ellington, Miles Davis and Charlie Parker jazz fusion.

Jimi Hendrix was also becoming influenced by jazz fusion and wanted to record an album with Miles Davis.

Prince said, "Eric Leeds played me this record, Duke Ellington Live at Newport, with that long saxophone solo [by Paul Gonsalves, on "Diminuendo and Crescendo in Blue"]. He was telling me that one reason the solo went as long as it did was that this lady jumped up on a table and started dancing to the rhythm, so naturally nobody wanted to quit. That's the vibe I'm trying to capture.

I will always respect people like Duke Ellington -- someone who has their own style and just watches music change around them."

http://princetext.tripod....ian97.html

Prince's Christopher Tracy look in the film and album cover seems to have been influenced by Duke Ellington, Little Richard and Mick Jagger.

Sign o the Times has a Band of Gypsys vibe.

Returning closer to their funk roots and with an African American band.

Prince said, "A lot of people criticized the last band that Jimi [Hendrix] had, but they were able to start and stop at his will; they were right for him at the time."

http://princetext.tripod....ian97.html

Prince did admit Jimi's influence.

The Jimi influence is quite evident in many ways including thematically, lyrically, etc.

I suspect Jimi's Electric Lady studio had an influence on Prince wanting his own Paisley Park recording studio.

In 1998 interviewer for Icon magazine, Toure, flipped through some of Prince's albums at Pasiley Park studios and found...

Although the Beatles will always be my favorite of all time, I find Sgt. Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band one of the most overrated albums ever, not in my top 3 of their albums.

Sign O 'The Times for me!

ps it's hard to get away from the influence of the Beatles ... and Prince is no exception.

EddieC said:

Actually, I find myself singing/humming "Within You Without You" more than anything else on the album. Getting Better is probably second.

Tremolina said:

I like the White Album the most

I went on a long road trip and made it a point to take the Beatles catalog along to listen to, and I am leaning on the White Album and Abbey Road more and more as my favorites ( The Beatles certainly grew by this point) But I think I Still like Revolver best. It's like Beatles concentrate.