V10LETBLUES said:

Aerogram said:

That's one person and it's not like he's competition for Taylor Swift (for those who measure quality by sales).

Lol The irony here is that people are upset that corny old lady songs like clouds and breakfast can wait are being outperformed by a well produced track with a great beat and a great horn hook. Lol Oh but it's Taylor Swift and it's breaking sales records! The battle of silly girl songs and people play that card. As if pop cheese like Breakfast Can Wait was gourmet compared to shake it off. Too funny [Edited 2/1/15 18:29pm]

If Clouds is a 'corny old lady song' to your ears then maybe music just isn't for you. There are plenty other pastimes.

jasminejoey said:

Lol
Yell that at the top of your lungs from a hilltop so all consumers can hear you and stop buying other people's music

Aerogram said:

Zannaloaf said:

Paul McCartney . Sounds great, amazing last record.

That's one person and it's not like he's competition for Taylor Swift (for those who measure quality by sales).

So how many names do you need before you move on to the next excuse? Let's try Nile Rodgers...

V10LETBLUES said:

Aerogram said:

That's one person and it's not like he's competition for Taylor Swift (for those who measure quality by sales).

Lol The irony here is that people are upset that corny old lady songs like clouds and breakfast can wait are being outperformed by a well produced track with a great beat and a great horn hook. Lol Oh but it's Taylor Swift and it's breaking sales records! The battle of silly girl songs and people play that card. As if pop cheese like Breakfast Can Wait was gourmet compared to shake it off. Too funny [Edited 2/1/15 18:29pm]

An ultra-conventional bougie mind like yours would rather stick to the theory that chart success is indicative of quality. It's a theory even Billboard executives find awfully reductive, if not dowright false, but keep pretending you're all about objectivity and music history has not already proved you wrong so many times.

funksterr said:

Areosmith was having major hits with members in their late 40's

funksterr said:

Aerogram said:

That's one person and it's not like he's competition for Taylor Swift (for those who measure quality by sales).

So how many names do you need before you move on to the next excuse? Let's try Nile Rodgers...

Niles Rodgers is a thing right now because of Daftpunk, not because he had one hit after the other on his own all of his later career.

You have nothing that disproves age is not a huge factor. We had Paul McArtney (who did not exactly ignite the charts non stop for the last 20 years), Lionel Richie (who finally had a good seller topping over 1 million after years of misses, it was a collection of his old songs, "reloaded") and Niles (currently known more as Daftpunk's guitarist if you believe Violet's gold standard for quality music),

Aerogram said:

So you're still proposing his new music is superior to what's on the charts. Is it the chipmunk voice? The laser beam sounds? The thin tinny production? Or is it he nasally vocals that make so superior?

V10LETBLUES said:

Aerogram said:

An ultra-conventional bougie mind like yours would rather stick to the theory that chart success is indicative of quality. It's a theory even Billboard executives find awfully reductive, if not dowright false, but keep pretending you're all about objectivity and music history has not already proved you wrong so many times.

So you're still proposing his new music is superior to what's on the charts. Is it the chipmunk voice? The laser beam sounds? The thin tinny production? Or is it he nasally vocals that make so superior?

THIS!

V10LETBLUES said:

Aerogram said:

An ultra-conventional bougie mind like yours would rather stick to the theory that chart success is indicative of quality. It's a theory even Billboard executives find awfully reductive, if not dowright false, but keep pretending you're all about objectivity and music history has not already proved you wrong so many times.

So you're still proposing his new music is superior to what's on the charts. Is it the chipmunk voice? The laser beam sounds? The thin tinny production? Or is it he nasally vocals that make so superior?

Nowhere did I say his music is superior to anything on the charts, you made that up because you can't back your ridiculously wrong assumption that what charts well is quality music, thereby what doesn't is not good music.

Unfortunately, dogmatic people like you have a narcissistic need to believe the debate ends when they personally make up their mind -- that's how highly they think of themselves, always coming down with definitive pronouncements they can't change. There must have been two dozens people telling you they have lush sound coming out of their loudspeakers, but no matter, Violet decrees the sound tinny, the debate has endeth.

In all honesty, when I first read the title of this thread, I thought it had to do with Rosie Gaines' health situation.

.

He could easily offer to pay her medical bills - in full - without blinking an eye. In that regard, Prince should be ashamed of himself.

funksterr said:

2funkE said:

When I was 14-18, a time period when you consume probably as much music as you ever will, there was no way we were listening to music from a 56 year old dude who happened to be relevant to the masses before I was born. Bowie's last album was excellent, and nobody except die hard's listened to it. It has very little to do with music quality IMHO. It has a lot to do with age, what demograpohic consumes music the most, and what they demand from their music. Prince does not make music easily digested by the masses.

Okay, you do realize Prince has written like 50-75 or so Top Ten hits, right? This is just a list of the one's released as Prince, but still: http://www.billboard.com/...board-hits He's been out of form for so long, I think peeps forget that Prince was a hugely successful commercial talent before he started thinking he was too big to fail, or whatever, and then went all bitter and mad at the world.

God only knows why he writes so uptight is more recent years, but until he has a song that sounds like it should be a radio hit, and he properly promotes it and nothing happens, I won't believe age is holding him back.

Your posted link refers to 19 top 10 hits, not 50-75? All of them except I believe 3.. occured when he was in his 20's. Consistent chart success is the domain of the young, becuase the vast majority of the sales are from people of similar or younger age. Can you name any artist achieving any regular chart success over the age of 45, 50? I honestly can't think of any. For me though I don't want/need prince to be a chart topper as I prefer his music weird and challenging.

terrig said:

FunkyD said:

Prince as been too much about teaching things ever since his conversion to JW instead of focusing on making FUN jams. Uptown Funk is a fun song. I don't hate Gold Stardard but hearing a song with lyrics about what music should sound like and how people should behave isn't really fun.

[Edited 1/31/15 12:18pm]

you have a really valid point here ......

Agreed.

V10LETBLUES said:

dbpdexter said:

If Prince put out uptown funk no one would pay attention to it. It's not that people think the song is good i'ts about who's singing it and Bruno Mars is the hot artist right now. If Bruno Mars put out AOA with his vocals instead of Prince it would have been album of the year. Nowindays people don't buy music because it's good they buy music that is the latest fashion and hot artist at the time.

Nonsense

I can't believe that this thread is all about P competing with anyone else...

Has anyone ever spare a thought on the other side of the pillow?

As a musician who is not depending on contracts nor has the eager need for a hit to pay the bills, wouldn't you think that P might just not care whether he gets another radio hit or not?
C'mon, when he is on a TV show, people freak out. His only presence at Awards shows, makes people who are the top of the charts wet her pants. Why should he feel that he needs to compete with them?

He releases music that he likes and that he thinks is cool. He doesn't really care about anyone, that is the pure concept of being an artist...

Feel free to have a different opinion...

2funkE said:

funksterr said:

The old too old excuse is back. Folks have used that one since Prince turned 30. If he were making music as entertaining as he used to or fun like some of the other acts that are more successful today, I'd believe. But right now he's really just getting beat on the music alone.

When I was 14-18, a time period when you consume probably as much music as you ever will, there was no way we were listening to music from a 56 year old dude who happened to be relevant to the masses before I was born. Bowie's last album was excellent, and nobody except die hard's listened to it. It has very little to do with music quality IMHO. It has a lot to do with age, what demograpohic consumes music the most, and what they demand from their music. Prince does not make music easily digested by the masses.

That's your opinion though. You can't speak for what others might/would/could have done because when I was 14 - 18, George Clinton's prior music had been so popular with the younger crowd that it was sampled repeatedly by so many young artists who would become huge successes - still to this day - that when he released new music it stll appealed to the masses just because it was him.

HatrinaHaterwitz said:

2funkE said:

When I was 14-18, a time period when you consume probably as much music as you ever will, there was no way we were listening to music from a 56 year old dude who happened to be relevant to the masses before I was born. Bowie's last album was excellent, and nobody except die hard's listened to it. It has very little to do with music quality IMHO. It has a lot to do with age, what demograpohic consumes music the most, and what they demand from their music. Prince does not make music easily digested by the masses.

That's your opinion though. You can't speak for what others might/would/could have done because when I was 14 - 18, George Clinton's prior music had been so popular with the younger crowd that it was sampled repeatedly by so many young artists who would become huge successes - still to this day - that when he released new music it stll appealed to the masses just because it was him.

What George Clinton album released after the age of forty-five appealed to the masses?

2funkE said:

George had to be that age or older when he releas his biggest hit Atomic Dog.
[Edited 2/2/15 6:57am]

Clinton was 41 when atomic dog was released

joecoco said:

I can't believe that this thread is all about P competing with anyone else...

Has anyone ever spare a thought on the other side of the pillow?

As a musician who is not depending on contracts nor has the eager need for a hit to pay the bills, wouldn't you think that P might just not care whether he gets another radio hit or not?
C'mon, when he is on a TV show, people freak out. His only presence at Awards shows, makes people who are the top of the charts wet her pants. Why should he feel that he needs to compete with them?

He releases music that he likes and that he thinks is cool. He doesn't really care about anyone, that is the pure concept of being an artist...

Feel free to have a different opinion...

I don't think he feels the need or even has to compete with anyone. However, he's always been the one that will talk big shit about new music and how the bar has been lowered to substandard levels and what not but then has turned right around and tried to incorporate that same substandardness into his own music because that's what was selling with the masses. Remember when he wasn't fond of rap? Then came Tony M. Remember when he didn't like people doing covers but then he covered "Betcha By Golly Wow" and a bunch of other people's songs? Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the music but his hypocrisy didn't go unnoticed.

It's nice that Prince can go on a TV show and people freak out or goes to an awards show and celebrities wet their pants but those aren't the people that spend money for his music just because he made it.

V10LETBLUES said:

Clinton was 41 when atomic dog was released

I know and that's ancient to a 14 year old.

V10LETBLUES said:

Clinton was 41 when atomic dog was released

Don't get me wrong, I love me some Atomic Dog, but the entire discussion is about older artists appealing to the masses. Atomic dog did not even break the top 100.

2funkE said:

V10LETBLUES said:

Clinton was 41 when atomic dog was released

Don't get me wrong, I love me some Atomic Dog, but the entire discussion is about older artists appealing to the masses. Atomic dog did not even break the top 100.

It missed the Hot 100 by 1 but was #1 on the R&B chart, which actually still meant something back then. So there was mass appeal.

hw3004 said:

Spot on

HatrinaHaterwitz said:

joecoco said:

I can't believe that this thread is all about P competing with anyone else...

Has anyone ever spare a thought on the other side of the pillow?

As a musician who is not depending on contracts nor has the eager need for a hit to pay the bills, wouldn't you think that P might just not care whether he gets another radio hit or not?
C'mon, when he is on a TV show, people freak out. His only presence at Awards shows, makes people who are the top of the charts wet her pants. Why should he feel that he needs to compete with them?

He releases music that he likes and that he thinks is cool. He doesn't really care about anyone, that is the pure concept of being an artist...

Feel free to have a different opinion...

I don't think he feels the need or even has to compete with anyone. However, he's always been the one that will talk big shit about new music and how the bar has been lowered to substandard levels and what not but then has turned right around and tried to incorporate that same substandardness into his own music because that's what was selling with the masses. Remember when he wasn't fond of rap? Then came Tony M. Remember when he didn't like people doing covers but then he covered "Betcha By Golly Wow" and a bunch of other people's songs? Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the music but his hypocrisy didn't go unnoticed.

It's nice that Prince can go on a TV show and people freak out or goes to an awards show and celebrities wet their pants but those aren't the people that spend money for his music just because he made it.

Over 30, 35 years, you can have those "Remember when X was a Y, and now he's a Z?" accusations of hypocrisy about upward to 80 % of adults over 50. He's like a lot of people, went through phases, made mistakes, had successes, changed his mind, said something he regretted, tried something, stopped, etc. The only difference is that he's a public person and has always been guarded for a celebrity, so he's around to be talked about but not to talk about it. People are free to assume what they want, they just don't have his side of the story.

V10LETBLUES said:

lezama said:

Bart, Hozier's song is a great. But with respect to the comment I was commenting on, his success is a an example of exceptio probat regulum fallacy. If someone makes a blanket statement about "how things are" as in describing some rule, then they should explain the rule, not the exception. If today's music industry produced more Hozier examples, that's be great.

[Edited 2/1/15 9:13am]

The music industry has changed. The internet has to a large extent democratized music. The music industry cannot control music distribution anymore. If someone like Prince, with name recognition, cache of genius status, the full backing of a major music industry mover and every major site on the internet and tv network pushing his music and still no one wants it, vs a nobody with none of that making it big is huge. The industry machine a lot of people here blame does not work anymore. People are becoming Youtube stars all on their own. New opportunities are cropping up without the need of the entrenched players. But regardless, you an artist and his work still has to resonate to rise to the top. There is more competition than ever before. Prince was jetted to the front of the line via his name alone. Given so much preferential treatment. Maybe you think his new album is great, well good for you, but the masses do not agree. [Edited 2/1/15 13:22pm]

This sounds very nice but with democratization of the production of music came a high oversaturation of the market, for which the genius of Google as been to provide a way to mass access of those that pay to the top. Everything is available, however no one has the time or interest to filter through all that's available. Things no longer work via pay to exist, today things are more like those that pay get to be seen through the oversaturation. Those that pay are those that get pushed. If I as a record producer see that a new star has potential to sell and make a lot of money for me I will invest what I can to get them to be seen and heard as much as possible. Before that artist has the time to renegotiate any terms of any contracts I have twith him or her (in which my share of the profit becomes less exciting to me ) I will have made my fortune and will leave it to them to continue to push themselves or negotiate with another label for the attention I gave them in the beginning. And by that point I will have cultivated 5-10 other artists I will hedge my bets with for the next generation. Your perception of the way things work don't fit reality.

.

I would recommend some books though that could open your eyes:

.

e.g. : Cowboys and Indies: The E...d Industry

What They'll Never Tell Y...w Truths)

HatrinaHaterwitz said:

2funkE said:

Don't get me wrong, I love me some Atomic Dog, but the entire discussion is about older artists appealing to the masses. Atomic dog did not even break the top 100.

It missed the Hot 100 by 1 but was #1 on the R&B chart, which actually still meant something back then. So there was mass appeal.

I agree the R&B chart meant more, but if it does not even crack the top 100 can we call it mass appeal. And that was one song. AOA was #1 on the R&B chart and had almost zero mass appeal.

To further illustrate my point, how big was Atomic Dog (Who Am I) when it was released by a young Snoop? #8 on the Billboard 100. Sure thre are lots of variables, bottom line there is little to no examples of any consistent pop chart success by anyone over 45. One hit out of the blue, sure, but nothing more than that. Happy to eat crow if I am missing someone. U2 maybe? They had Beautiful Day and then Vertigo which charted well, but I think that's it.

[Edited 2/2/15 8:31am]

hw3004 said:

Songs are hit's for lots of reasons - sometimes because of expectations, reputations and/or hype and sometimes because they are, plain and simply, a good song.

Uptown Funk would have been a massive hit if it was released by Mark Ronson featuring Prince instead of Bruno Mars.

Is it derivative of/ influenced by the Minneapolis Sound? Sure....but what so wrong with that? What's so different from Prince having a hit with Sexy MF, a song which owed JB as much of a debt than Ronson owes Prince here.

James Brown rapped? What?

Se7en said:

In all honesty, when I first read the title of this thread, I thought it had to do with Rosie Gaines' health situation.

.

He could easily offer to pay her medical bills - in full - without blinking an eye. In that regard, Prince should be ashamed of himself.

Didn't the organizer lady say that Prince did help out? It was in one of the recent C.J. tabloids.

[Edited 2/2/15 9:00am]

funksterr said:

2funkE said:

Prince is 56 years old. Nearly TRIPLE the age of some pop stars. No matter what he releases it will not be popular to the masses.

The old too old excuse is back. Folks have used that one since Prince turned 30. If he were making music as entertaining as he used to or fun like some of the other acts that are more successful today, I'd believe. But right now he's really just getting beat on the music alone.

It's pretty well known and well discussed that Madonna has for several albums heavily used "sponsored promotion" (the modern term for payola) and/or special "arrangements" with Clear Channel to get airplay for her singles. Justin Timberlake and Mariah as well. Even younger artists like Beyonce, Britney, every single thing made by Pittbull and J-Lo etc etc.. So I agree that it's not simply age. But anyone claiming that "good" music is what gets played need to do a little research.

2funkE said:

HatrinaHaterwitz said:

It missed the Hot 100 by 1 but was #1 on the R&B chart, which actually still meant something back then. So there was mass appeal.

I agree the R&B chart meant more, but if it does not even crack the top 100 can we call it mass appeal. And that was one song. AOA was #1 on the R&B chart and had almost zero mass appeal.

To further illustrate my point, how big was Atomic Dog (Who Am I) when it was released by a young Snoop? #8 on the Billboard 100. Sure thre are lots of variables, bottom line there is little to no examples of any consistent pop chart success by anyone over 45. One hit out of the blue, sure, but nothing more than that. Happy to eat crow if I am missing someone. U2 maybe? They had Beautiful Day and then Vertigo which charted well, but I think that's it.

[Edited 2/2/15 8:31am]

How about Tina Turner? "Private Dancer" was released in 1984 when she was 45. She had mad success with that album and consistently had single hits over the next decade.