TheEnglishGent said:

SquirrelMeat said:

True. It did sound sexy. And he seemed particularly into it. I think he knew it would be a shocker to pull it out of the bag. Empty Room was a killer too.

He was really getting into What's My Name? as well, but I think his boots were playing him up so he went backstage to change them while ida killed it with her bass.

What's my name, oh my, completely missed that on the set list, I think I was blinded by EI being there. Would love to hear him do What's My Name with this band, always loved it. Someone better have recorded this show!

Yeah, full heavy. It started like the studio version, but with an extended intro, with the gentle drum machine/keyboard sample ticking along. I recognised it from the first note and was thinking, "no way". then it was...."way!"

Based on the missing words, I vote it should now be called "Electric Interval"

V10LETBLUES said:

Bambi82 said:

Would you appreciate someone having the "balls to tell you to your face" that what you felt necessary to do to YOUR work was shit?

of course I would. Any artist would. As an artist you expect it. You put your work out their and criticism is a large part of it. That no one around him has the balls to be honest with an artist is far more concerning. And I would expect record executives with money on the line not to be sycophants because he is a legend. I would expect the record executives to realize what music is beloved of him by not be messed with.

You seem to be forgetting the fact that you weren't supposed to have heard most of the music you claim shouldn't be changed. You're also assuming just because you consider it a finished product and what Prince intended that it is just that. Also he didn't put the work out there it was stolen from him.

Bertrand said:

Not interested in getting JW reworks of songs from the 80's.

[Edited 5/16/14 2:31am]

You do realise these "Jehova's Witness" versions don't have him singing about his faith? A better term would be "cuss free" versions or something

Also I preferred the live version to any other version I had heard prior to last night - I could very well be alone here but I thought it had a better build and frankly - leaving out the word intercourse sounded better cause it just sounds so damn awkward when sung
Try waiting til' you here a recording of this new version before you start condemning it.

Let's just... hope. I want to hope and pretend. It's so much nicer.

My opinion is that one can alter their behaviors without denying the past.

.

I can see a cohesive approach in not using sexually explicit or vulgar vocabulary in live renditions of songs or new recordings BUT releasing past material, whether previously released or not, as it was at the time. For example I would have found quite outrageous, as a feminist, and absolutely gross, as a mature human being, to have had a 53 years-old Prince release a brand new rerecording of Extraloveable with the "rape" lyrics still in it. Nonetheless while I couldn't excuse that line in the mouth of a 53 years old mature man, I can accept it perfectly in the context of a sexually frustrated, rebelious and provocative 23 years old Prince. Similarly, I think prince would look like a clown singing Head on stage today, while it was a lot of fun in the 80's.

.

I think a reasonable compromise could and should be the release of an explicit version of the remasters and a "family friendly" version that's censored, something Prince already had done in 92 and 96 with and Emancipation.

.

My policy is very strict in that matter: though I hardly ever buy music anymore I am resolved to buy the remasters of Purple Rain and other albums on a legal digital platform if the material is offered in an unaltered version, if only to support the remastering campaign and contribute to making it happen for P's entire catalogue instead of only the most successful albums.

.

However, should the albums be available only in a censored version (something I absolutely don't believe is gonna happen, as stated numerous times on this forum), I will not support the project and download it illegaly on a filesharing platform. I won't put any money in a release that'll be of little interest to me, period.

.

I think both Prince and WB are aware of the critical and fans alike bashing campaign that would happen should the albums be released in censored form only, and this is why I don't believe it'll happen. A parental advisory sticker on the cover can prevent whoever may be offensed by Darling Nikki to buy it, and a more family friendly version can be sold for such people if P wishes the material to be listenable by 8 years-old kids and conservative christians.

databank said:

My opinion is that one can alter their behaviors without denying the past.

.

I can see a cohesive approach in not using sexually explicit or vulgar vocabulary in live renditions of songs or new recordings BUT releasing past material, whether previously released or not, as it was at the time. For example I would have found quite outrageous, as a feminist, and absolutely gross, as a mature human being, to have had a 53 years-old Prince release a brand new rerecording of Extraloveable with the "rape" lyrics still in it. Nonetheless while I couldn't excuse that line in the mouth of a 53 years old mature man, I can accept it perfectly in the context of a sexually frustrated, rebelious and provocative 23 years old Prince. Similarly, I think prince would look like a clown singing Head on stage today, while it was a lot of fun in the 80's.

.

I think a reasonable compromise could and should be the release of an explicit version of the remasters and a "family friendly" version that's censored, something Prince already had done in 92 and 96 with and Emancipation.

.

My policy is very strict in that matter: though I hardly ever buy music anymore I am resolved to buy the remasters of Purple Rain and other albums on a legal digital platform if the material is offered in an unaltered version, if only to support the remastering campaign and contribute to making it happen for P's entire catalogue instead of only the most successful albums.

.

However, should the albums be available only in a censored version (something I absolutely don't believe is gonna happen, as stated numerous times on this forum), I will not support the project and download it illegaly on a filesharing platform. I won't put any money in a release that'll be of little interest to me, period.

.

I think both Prince and WB are aware of the critical and fans alike bashing campaign that would happen should the albums be released in censored form only, and this is why I don't believe it'll happen. A parental advisory sticker on the cover can prevent whoever may be offensed by Darling Nikki to buy it, and a more family friendly version can be sold for such people if P wishes the material to be listenable by 8 years-old kids and conservative christians.

Prince is also making sure he doesn't come across as a dirty old man. Last night, the lyrics to Hot thing were changed to "Hot Thing, barely 25". I'm looking forward to his concerts in 20 years time when it will be, "Hot Thing, barely 41".

bfunk said:

"I say the first Intercourse, I say the first one"

In terms of his recent censoring, I think the word Intecourse is pretty benign. Why would he not want to use that term and yet still say "climax". As with most things we as fans are probably reading into it way too much.

For all we know what he did in the studio with overdubs and whatnot could have changed what we know of from the rehearsal and live versions that are widely circulating. Hell, it could have been recorded ove since The Beautiful Ones took its place.

Right, there is nothing wrong or dirty about the word intercourse, I mean that word by itself talks more than sexuality. To not say intercourse yet say climax

But as you said, he could be just teasing folk. Hopefully he keeps it as it is originally.

databank said:

Trevor was RIGHT and I ... DATABANK .. am wrong ... Prince is in fact censoring his work and the remasters will be a pathetic joke .. TREVOR TOLD ME SO BUT I WOULDN'T LISTEN

fixed it for ya!

iZsaZsa said:

"Hot Thing, barely 41"

lol

81 R U Legal Yet?

51 and Over...

SquirrelMeat said:

databank said:

My opinion is that one can alter their behaviors without denying the past.

.

I can see a cohesive approach in not using sexually explicit or vulgar vocabulary in live renditions of songs or new recordings BUT releasing past material, whether previously released or not, as it was at the time. For example I would have found quite outrageous, as a feminist, and absolutely gross, as a mature human being, to have had a 53 years-old Prince release a brand new rerecording of Extraloveable with the "rape" lyrics still in it. Nonetheless while I couldn't excuse that line in the mouth of a 53 years old mature man, I can accept it perfectly in the context of a sexually frustrated, rebelious and provocative 23 years old Prince. Similarly, I think prince would look like a clown singing Head on stage today, while it was a lot of fun in the 80's.

.

I think a reasonable compromise could and should be the release of an explicit version of the remasters and a "family friendly" version that's censored, something Prince already had done in 92 and 96 with and Emancipation.

.

My policy is very strict in that matter: though I hardly ever buy music anymore I am resolved to buy the remasters of Purple Rain and other albums on a legal digital platform if the material is offered in an unaltered version, if only to support the remastering campaign and contribute to making it happen for P's entire catalogue instead of only the most successful albums.

.

However, should the albums be available only in a censored version (something I absolutely don't believe is gonna happen, as stated numerous times on this forum), I will not support the project and download it illegaly on a filesharing platform. I won't put any money in a release that'll be of little interest to me, period.

.

I think both Prince and WB are aware of the critical and fans alike bashing campaign that would happen should the albums be released in censored form only, and this is why I don't believe it'll happen. A parental advisory sticker on the cover can prevent whoever may be offensed by Darling Nikki to buy it, and a more family friendly version can be sold for such people if P wishes the material to be listenable by 8 years-old kids and conservative christians.

Prince is also making sure he doesn't come across as a dirty old man. Last night, the lyrics to Hot thing were changed to "Hot Thing, barely 25". I'm looking forward to his concerts in 20 years time when it will be, "Hot Thing, barely 41".

actually barely 41 flows better.

55 and 25 is still dirty old man

He censored himself with Old Friends 4 Sale 85 - 94

.

Extralovable that best line was: Baby, you could turn my mama on
She's just as straight, just as straight as straight can be
Even though my daddy's gone
Come back just to haunt you, come back just to haunt you mystically
(Yes he will)
.

.

If Prince can't even deal with the word Intercourse...

OldFriends4Sale said:

He censored himself with Old Friends 4 Sale 85 - 94

.

Extralovable that best line was: Baby, you could turn my mama on
She's just as straight, just as straight as straight can be
Even though my daddy's gone
Come back just to haunt you, come back just to haunt you mystically
(Yes he will)
.

.

If Prince can't even deal with the word Intercourse...

Does he still use the "door number pants" line?

Prince doesn't swear now or use the word intercourse, we get it, but seriously Prince, those songs were a snapshot of who you were then, we all know who you are now, just release the stuff as is for cryin out loud. Heck, use a disclaimer on the music if you have to.

"past swears and overt sexual themes are not necessarily representative of present or future me"

He should release the stuff as he intended it to be when he created it, otherwise it is not a true snapshot of his journey to where he is now.

He could release the original versions along with any remaster that he does. That would be an interesting testament to how he has changed over the years, but releasing only hacked up versions of his unreleased classics just would't cut it for me. Would I buy em? Sure, but I would still feel a bit let down.

Peace

[Edited 5/16/14 7:21am]

If he only left out that one word, I don't care. Extralovable is unlistenable for me now.

leadline said:

Prince doesn't swear now or use the word intercourse, we get it, but seriously Prince, those songs were a snapshot of who you were then, we all know who you are now, just release the stuff as is for cryin out loud. Heck, use a disclaimer on the music if you have to.

"past swears and overt sexual themes of the past are not necessarily who I am today"

He should release the stuff as he intended it to be when he created it, otherwise it is not a true snapshot of his journey to where he is now.

He could release the original versions along with any remaster that he does. That would be an interesting testament to how he has changed over the years, but releasing only hacked up versions of his unreleased classics just would't cut it for me. Would I buy em? Sure, but I would still feel a bit let down.

Peace

[Edited 5/16/14 6:36am]

I agree with you for the most part. However, it is his music and he can do what he wants.

I am scared. Best news to me is the remasters (I don't care anymore for the new music).....

But:


PLEASE, PRETTY PLEASE, DON'T F*CK UP THE REMASTERS AS WELL, with this crazzy self-sensorship.......

Please let those remasters be great......... it's a one in a lifetime chance, don't waste it...

PLEASE.....

As SquirrelMeat said, he sang everything else including 'technicolour climax', 'don't you wanna make love' etc. He's clearly fine with the intense sexual nature of the song, he probably just thought the word intercourse sounded a bit cringy in the chorus so he dropped it.

TrevorAyer said:

databank said:

Trevor was RIGHT and I ... DATABANK .. am wrong ... Prince is in fact censoring his work and the remasters will be a pathetic joke .. TREVOR TOLD ME SO BUT I WOULDN'T LISTEN

fixed it for ya!

dualboot said:

I've only just thought! Did he nail the scream towards the end?!

lordfalconer said:

Bertrand said:

Not interested in getting JW reworks of songs from the 80's.

[Edited 5/16/14 2:31am]

You do realise these "Jehova's Witness" versions don't have him singing about his faith? A better term would be "cuss free" versions or something

Also I preferred the live version to any other version I had heard prior to last night - I could very well be alone here but I thought it had a better build and frankly - leaving out the word intercourse sounded better cause it just sounds so damn awkward when sung
Try waiting til' you here a recording of this new version before you start condemning it.

My point is not that he is not allowed to reword his songs. That would be complete nonsense.

What I wanted to say was that, for a CD release from the 80's, I expect to get the versions from the 80's. If I go to the shop and buy tracks from the Purple Rain era, I expect to get the recordings from the PR era, not touches from 30 years later. Prince would be entirely fine to release the new reworked version on a new album which has NOTHING to do with Purple Rain. This would be entirely legitimate.

Having said that, going from "the beautiful ones" to the "electric whatever it is now" indd

icates that it might be on purpose. Many people know about the song and most die hard fans have the first avenue '83. Plus, remember the performance from 1983 was a PUBLIC performance. It had nothing to do with a private studio recording which was meant to be kept secret.

I recommend you to watch Purple Rain and listen to it as it sounds new to you. You will notice that the original versions from 1984 have no religion in them. But, I respect new people. You can find it on DVD, BluRay and CD. You should have no problem to get it and give it a try. It's ok mate. no worries.

[Edited 5/16/14 8:11am]

Has this come up? It's not always a dirty word.

noun

• 1 [mass noun] Communication or dealings between individuals or groups: everyday social intercourse