once again a disaster... in the reMASTERED series.....rejoin WB and do hitz again...

databank said:

2 asnwer comments above, SOTT as it is just doesn't fit on a single CD unless being edited, but I fail 2 c how an edit would do justice to the original album if it was to b remastered.

.

As 4 CB yed of course it's a bit odd for it contains many tracks that's been released on SOTT and other albums/singles. Now we're talking over expensive deluxe box-set, not a casual release 4 causal listeners. I have the bootleg version of CB as intended, I find it to be a mind blowing collection/sequencing and it reflects 's original vision of the album. I'm sorry some people here wouldn't be interested, it'd be interesting 2 know if it's the majority (gonna create a yeah or nay thread 2 check this out), I can understand of course but I wouldn't mind spending a few additional dozen dollars for it (after all had it been released on bootleg back when those were sold, I'm quite sure most of would have bought it).

I am dumbfounded that someone of your knowledge doesn't know this. You have to have 3,000 times the Prince knowldge I have, and you couldn't figure this out????

If you add up all the times of all the songs, it is right around 80 minutes. Bart correctly noted you could edit off a few seconds. To clarify this, the "Seconds" you would edit off would simply be the empty space between tracks that do not bleed into one another like SOTT/Play Sunshine. If we want to pretend that the actual sound was over 80 minutes, I'm sure nobody would die if 5 seconds of crowd noise at the end of the overly long Beautiful Night was faded out, and we could actually have Adore without stupid crowd noise from another song in it. SOTT should have been pressed as one disc from at least 1990 on, but Warner's simply would have rather had the money from selling two discs at that point.

[Edited 6/16/14 9:11am]

databank said:

love2thenines2003 said:

The release is only about the Remastered japan BRay version of SOTT...ONLY...this is a HUGE MISTAKE not to be confused with an hypothetical release(probably never) of SOTT remastered WB version!!

Oh pleaaaaaaaaaaaase There's no need 4 irrational negativity

There's also no need to believe that anything aside from MAYBE a handfull of b-sides would be included on an official reissue of SOTT. Warners did not give Prince his masters back without a fight so they could make an atristic statement. They did it to make money. Very little money would be made by a ridiculous 5-7 disc release of an album that is of interest only to pretty small portion of the public. It would probably do better in Europe. Even then I can't see it doing well enough to justify such a large and undoubtedly expensive package.

steakfinger said:

databank said:

Oh pleaaaaaaaaaaaase There's no need 4 irrational negativity

There's also no need to believe that anything aside from MAYBE a handfull of b-sides would be included on an official reissue of SOTT. Warners did not give Prince his masters back without a fight so they could make an atristic statement. They did it to make money. Very little money would be made by a ridiculous 5-7 disc release of an album that is of interest only to pretty small portion of the public. It would probably do better in Europe. Even then I can't see it doing well enough to justify such a large and undoubtedly expensive package.

You're actually wrong. Single CD remasters have made very little profit. Just look at the bargain bins. They are full of Van Halen, Madonna, and MJ remasters sitting around not moving. Selling multi-disc packages to a select few diehards for overinflated prices is where the remaster money is at. Other than Purple Rain, 1999, and maybe DAP, single CD or Double CD sets will bring in hardly any real profit.

databank said:

love2thenines2003 said:

The release is only about the Remastered japan BRay version of SOTT...ONLY...this is a HUGE MISTAKE not to be confused with an hypothetical release(probably never) of SOTT remastered WB version!!

Oh pleaaaaaaaaaaaase There's no need 4 irrational negativity

It all depends on the CONtract.

And the money.

Mr. Prince might lose interest but the albums might be remastered anyways. Just a slightly less interesting release because of lack of outtakes and such.

It's also available on amazon uk site (blu ray) although I think it's the Australian version, which I own myself and I think it is better than than the Canadian dvd version, but remember whatever version you prefer u got the look is always going to look grainy as it's filmed that way.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Prince-Sign-O-Times-Blu-Ray/dp/B00C0DV4XM/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1403005454&sr=8-2&keywords=prince+sign+of+the+times+blu+ray

stillwaiting said:

databank said:

2 asnwer comments above, SOTT as it is just doesn't fit on a single CD unless being edited, but I fail 2 c how an edit would do justice to the original album if it was to b remastered.

.

As 4 CB yed of course it's a bit odd for it contains many tracks that's been released on SOTT and other albums/singles. Now we're talking over expensive deluxe box-set, not a casual release 4 causal listeners. I have the bootleg version of CB as intended, I find it to be a mind blowing collection/sequencing and it reflects 's original vision of the album. I'm sorry some people here wouldn't be interested, it'd be interesting 2 know if it's the majority (gonna create a yeah or nay thread 2 check this out), I can understand of course but I wouldn't mind spending a few additional dozen dollars for it (after all had it been released on bootleg back when those were sold, I'm quite sure most of would have bought it).

I am dumbfounded that someone of your knowledge doesn't know this. You have to have 3,000 times the Prince knowldge I have, and you couldn't figure this out????

If you add up all the times of all the songs, it is right around 80 minutes. Bart correctly noted you could edit off a few seconds. To clarify this, the "Seconds" you would edit off would simply be the empty space between tracks that do not bleed into one another like SOTT/Play Sunshine. If we want to pretend that the actual sound was over 80 minutes, I'm sure nobody would die if 5 seconds of crowd noise at the end of the overly long Beautiful Night was faded out, and we could actually have Adore without stupid crowd noise from another song in it. SOTT should have been pressed as one disc from at least 1990 on, but Warner's simply would have rather had the money from selling two discs at that point.

[Edited 6/16/14 9:11am]

I have to admit that I've never taken the care to calculate how long SOTT is (79:58 according to Wikipedia), the mere fact that it was released on 2 CD's by WB made me think that it was the only option (why not one CD if possible? why make it more expensive that it should be and why, then, not release 1999 on 2 CD's as well? As far as I know it's unheard of that a double LP that'd fit on a single CD would be released on 2 CD's). SO IDK, my understanding of CD's is that one can contain 80 mn of music so then yeah, I'm puzzled. If, though, rereleasing it -and we're talking deluxe remaster- means amputating it of a few seconds of silence between tracks then I say HELL NO, NEVER! The duration of silence between tracks is a choice usually made by the artist, it's part of the album's pace and it's an artistic decision. So no, I'm sorry, I'm not gonna give up on a few seconds between songs to save 5 or even 10 miserable dollars, I'm not that poor.

As for your suggestion to amputate the crowd noise at the end of IGBABN and the begining of Adore, I'm sorry but I'm calling this very idea a MONSTRUOSITY, no less. I say while we're at it why shouldn't they make a poll on this fourm and ask the fans what they don't like in every album and edit the results out of the remasters (bye bye Tony M. ), and then it's cool 4 to censor lyrics as well because after all what's the point in keeping the albums intact, trading a "fuck" against a scractch sound worked perfectly on the Ahdio Shows tracks in 2001, it didn't alter the musicality at all so let's go 4 this as well and make all JW's happy. I'm sorry but I don't agree with rewriting history. Artists should be free to alter their own work à la George Lucas or Ayn Rand but only if the original versions remain widely available for the sake of historicity alongside the reworked versions. And those alterations certainly shouldn't be the result of cheap concerns, i.e. saving some space on a deluxe boxset to help fans save a few bucks on a boxset that'll be expensive anyway. I'm also totally against adding bonus tracks on the CD that contains the original album or, if doing so, that means putting at least 2-3 minutes of silence between the last track and the bonus tracks. I'm sorry but when Adore ends (or Purple Rain, or Sometimes It Snows In April) I don't want to immediately being jumped at by another song when, actually, the story's over.

I'm a purist, I know not everyone is, but I can't agree with what I don't agree with.

Stillwaiting lost me at "overly long" myself.

jaawwnn said:

Stillwaiting lost me at "overly long" myself.

Well it's good that u'd mention Still Waiting because the version on the CD is a single edit that mysteriously (no one knows how nor why it happened!) replaced the original album version. I do hope with all my heart that the remaster restores the original version where it belongs and relegate the 2 single edits as bonus track, which is where they belong.

stillwaiting said:

databank said:

2 asnwer comments above, SOTT as it is just doesn't fit on a single CD unless being edited, but I fail 2 c how an edit would do justice to the original album if it was to b remastered.

.

As 4 CB yed of course it's a bit odd for it contains many tracks that's been released on SOTT and other albums/singles. Now we're talking over expensive deluxe box-set, not a casual release 4 causal listeners. I have the bootleg version of CB as intended, I find it to be a mind blowing collection/sequencing and it reflects 's original vision of the album. I'm sorry some people here wouldn't be interested, it'd be interesting 2 know if it's the majority (gonna create a yeah or nay thread 2 check this out), I can understand of course but I wouldn't mind spending a few additional dozen dollars for it (after all had it been released on bootleg back when those were sold, I'm quite sure most of would have bought it).

If you add up all the times of all the songs, it is right around 80 minutes. Bart correctly noted you could edit off a few seconds. To clarify this, the "Seconds" you would edit off would simply be the empty space between tracks that do not bleed into one another like SOTT/Play Sunshine. If we want to pretend that the actual sound was over 80 minutes, I'm sure nobody would die if 5 seconds of crowd noise at the end of the overly long Beautiful Night was faded out, and we could actually have Adore without stupid crowd noise from another song in it. SOTT should have been pressed as one disc from at least 1990 on, but Warner's simply would have rather had the money from selling two discs at that point.

SOTT = 80 mins, plus a few secs,

might easily fit on 1 cd...

When SOTT was released in 1987, a CD could only contain 74 minutes of music on 1 disk.


Now.... it's 80 minutes, and therefor the company can easily cut half a sec here and there without harm any of the songs,

Just to cut a bit of the silence inbetween tracks..

.

[Edited 6/17/14 7:36am]

^ ....

[Edited 6/17/14 7:35am]

databank said:

jaawwnn said:

Stillwaiting lost me at "overly long" myself.

Well it's good that u'd mention Still Waiting because the version on the CD is a single edit that mysteriously (no one knows how nor why it happened!) replaced the original album version. I do hope with all my heart that the remaster restores the original version where it belongs and relegate the 2 single edits as bonus track, which is where they belong.

hahaha. Swear to God I would have never noticed that until I read it somewhere on here.

jaawwnn said:

databank said:

Well it's good that u'd mention Still Waiting because the version on the CD is a single edit that mysteriously (no one knows how nor why it happened!) replaced the original album version. I do hope with all my heart that the remaster restores the original version where it belongs and relegate the 2 single edits as bonus track, which is where they belong.

hahaha. Swear to God I would have never noticed that until I read it somewhere on here.

Me neither, I mean 4 years I had it on cassette and even though I've never checked I guess it was the same as the LP, and I never heard the difference on the CD, I had to read it here back in 2004.

thedance said:

^ ....

[Edited 6/17/14 7:35am]

That's weird then, why did they chose to amputate 1999 from a track then rerelease it as a whole on a single CD and didn't they do the same with SOTT once CD's could contain 80 mn? I mean I'm not sure that from an economic POV the ration between saving one CD and selling the package for a higher price is more profitable than selling a cheaper single CD, or majors would have done it with every double LP, which they didn't

Databank:


I don't know if am answering your question,

But "1999" the album, was released on a single CD disk in circa 1986, omitting the track "DMSR".....

Later editions includes all tracks....

(but of course you know already..., I am not sure I understand your message.... ?)

[Edited 6/17/14 7:55am]

thedance said:

Databank:


I don't know if am answering your question,

But "1999" the album, was released on a single CD disk in circa 1986, omitting the track "DMSR".....

Later editions includes all tracks....

(but of course you know already..., I am not sure I understand your message.... ?)

[Edited 6/17/14 7:55am]

My message is that while I understand they wouldn't amputate 's last, new album from a track when released in 87 (contrarly to 1999 which was an older release), why didn't they make it a single CD as soon as the technology allowed it (circa 1991 or 1992 IIRC)? To this day it's avalaible as a double CD, which is absurd if the record, as such, could fit on a single CD.

Okay so I'm confused....If this is just a blu-ray re-release of th Japan SOTT DVD, why in the world would it be so expensive?

How do we know for sure it isn't a cd remaster?

databank said:

jaawwnn said:

Stillwaiting lost me at "overly long" myself.

Well it's good that u'd mention Still Waiting because the version on the CD is a single edit that mysteriously (no one knows how nor why it happened!) replaced the original album version. I do hope with all my heart that the remaster restores the original version where it belongs and relegate the 2 single edits as bonus track, which is where they belong.

The HDTracks release has the full version of Still Waiting.

TheKid94 said:

TheKid94 said:

Okay so I'm confused....If this is just a blu-ray re-release of th Japan SOTT DVD, why in the world would it be so expensive?

How do we know for sure it isn't a cd remaster?

Jesus! We just know, OK? Thx

Maybe Prince & WB might considered this version of The Ballad of Dorothy Parker for the supposed Remaster of SOTT ?

Unreleased 12" sleeve for The Ballad Of Dorothy Parker... looks wonderful and it was scheduled to include an unreleased extended version of this song!

For more info>>

http://www.princevault.co...thy_Parker

love2thenines2003 said:

Maybe Prince & WB might considered this version of The Ballad of Dorothy Parker for the supposed Remaster of SOTT ?

Unreleased 12" sleeve for The Ballad Of Dorothy Parker... looks wonderful and it was scheduled to include an unreleased extended version of this song!

For more info>>

http://www.princevault.co...thy_Parker

Some songs are necessary additions 2 remasters if only because of their legendary status among fans, either as circulating bootlegs or never heard songs. This one is definitely one of those songs

bfunk said:

databank said:

Well it's good that u'd mention Still Waiting because the version on the CD is a single edit that mysteriously (no one knows how nor why it happened!) replaced the original album version. I do hope with all my heart that the remaster restores the original version where it belongs and relegate the 2 single edits as bonus track, which is where they belong.

The HDTracks release has the full version of Still Waiting.

Interesting, thx 4 the info. Must have been done using the original master not a CD, then. Interesting that they wouldn't simply rip CD's on that website.

I did an 80-minute version of SOTT on CD-R a long time ago (more than 10 years I guess) and I only had to remove bits of silence here and there. Which can already be a problem, actually, as it slightly changes the flow of the album. You might not be aware of it, but your brain *knows* how much silence there is between "If I Was Your Girlfriend" and "Strange Relationship".

databank said:

2 asnwer comments above, SOTT as it is just doesn't fit on a single CD unless being edited, but I fail 2 c how an edit would do justice to the original album if it was to b remastered.

.

As 4 CB yed of course it's a bit odd for it contains many tracks that's been released on SOTT and other albums/singles. Now we're talking over expensive deluxe box-set, not a casual release 4 causal listeners. I have the bootleg version of CB as intended, I find it to be a mind blowing collection/sequencing and it reflects 's original vision of the album. I'm sorry some people here wouldn't be interested, it'd be interesting 2 know if it's the majority (gonna create a yeah or nay thread 2 check this out), I can understand of course but I wouldn't mind spending a few additional dozen dollars for it (after all had it been released on bootleg back when those were sold, I'm quite sure most of would have bought it).

olb99 said:

I did an 80-minute version of SOTT on CD-R a long time ago (more than 10 years I guess) and I only had to remove bits of silence here and there. Which can already be a problem, actually, as it slightly changes the flow of the album. You might not be aware of it, but your brain *knows* how much silence there is between "If I Was Your Girlfriend" and "Strange Relationship".

HA! Thanks for confirming what I was saying above and help me put an end to the horrible wishes of vandalism some people 4mulate on this forum

thedance said:

"1999" the album, was released on a single CD disk in circa 1986, omitting the track "DMSR".....

I remember seeing that CD in a record store and I refused to buy it I wanted that album on CD,but not if it doesn't include "DMSR",the funkiest track on the album! That's absurd! LOL,thank God they later reissued the CD with all the tracks included.

databank said:

olb99 said:

I did an 80-minute version of SOTT on CD-R a long time ago (more than 10 years I guess) and I only had to remove bits of silence here and there. Which can already be a problem, actually, as it slightly changes the flow of the album. You might not be aware of it, but your brain *knows* how much silence there is between "If I Was Your Girlfriend" and "Strange Relationship".

HA! Thanks for confirming what I was saying above and help me put an end to the horrible wishes of vandalism some people 4mulate on this forum

Plus we're in 2014. I don't care about CDs and their stupid limitations. Give me FLAC files and booklets as PDF files (Qobuz FTW!).

stillwaiting said:

If you add up all the times of all the songs, it is right around 80 minutes. Bart correctly noted you could edit off a few seconds. To clarify this, the "Seconds" you would edit off would simply be the empty space between tracks that do not bleed into one another like SOTT/Play Sunshine.

.

That's my suspicion, yes; I'm pretty sure there are some seconds of silence at the end of one or more tracks that can be removed so SOTT fits on a single disc, I doubt you'd even need to cut into actual music/crowd noise. Never tried it myself, though.

databank said:

I have to admit that I've never taken the care to calculate how long SOTT is (79:58 according to Wikipedia), the mere fact that it was released on 2 CD's by WB made me think that it was the only option (why not one CD if possible? why make it more expensive that it should be and why, then, not release 1999 on 2 CD's as well?

.

1999 was originally edited: the original CD lacked one song. This was later fixed.

.

If, though, rereleasing it -and we're talking deluxe remaster- means amputating it of a few seconds of silence between tracks then I say HELL NO, NEVER! The duration of silence between tracks is a choice usually made by the artist, it's part of the album's pace and it's an artistic decision.

.

AFAIK it was mostly done to separate grooves on a vinyl record.

.

One could even argue that logic to its extreme, i.e. each side of a pre-CD era release should be one CD, because after all originally you needed to get up and flip the record to listen to the other side and the record was conceived to have an A-side and a B-side etcetera.

.

So no, I'm sorry, I'm not gonna give up on a few seconds between songs to save 5 or even 10 miserable dollars, I'm not that poor.

.

It was nothing to do with saving money, but with convenience.

.

I'm also totally against adding bonus tracks on the CD that contains the original album or, if doing so, that means putting at least 2-3 minutes of silence between the last track and the bonus tracks. I'm sorry but when Adore ends (or Purple Rain, or Sometimes It Snows In April) I don't want to immediately being jumped at by another song when, actually, the story's over.

.

Practically that's simply impossible. If you look at some recent reissues by e.g. Cherry Red in the UK, they always try to squeeze as much music as possible and if that means adding bonus tracks to the original album so the reissue can be just a 2CD set instead of a 3CD set that has merely 2 CDs of content... (It's also more practical: a 2CD set can still fit into a regular jewel disc package, a 3CD set inevitable needs to be housed in a bigger box.)

databank said:

My message is that while I understand they wouldn't amputate 's last, new album from a track when released in 87 (contrarly to 1999 which was an older release), why didn't they make it a single CD as soon as the technology allowed it (circa 1991 or 1992 IIRC)? To this day it's avalaible as a double CD, which is absurd if the record, as such, could fit on a single CD.

.

Most likely because the 1999 reissue fixed a significant problem: a missing track. Putting SOTT on one disc wouldn't fix anything, and would perhaps cut into their profits?