BartVanHemelen said:

mrgone777 said:

BINGO! Well put !ZsaZsa

.

Please inform us how the employees inside will manage to hand out free food to someone WHO IS NOT INSIDE.

Drive thru wiindow... very common for employees to give away food to thier freinds thru the drive thru window. Dont even have t be in a car sometimes.... just walk up.

Graycap23 said:

BigDaddyHQ said:

BigDaddyHQ said:

BartVanHemelen said:

.

Please inform us how the employees inside will manage to hand out free food to someone WHO IS NOT INSIDE.

Drive thru wiindow... very common for employees to give away food to thier freinds thru the drive thru window. Dont even have t be in a car sometimes.... just walk up.

Yup, word up BigDaddyHQ....BartVanHemelen that's how it works in the real world buddy...apparently no one does this where you come from?

It's an interesting question... why Pop (as the most general term) musicians have a limited shelf life, compared to composers for orchestra who don't (and never have).

Music can't be scientifically judged in the same way we can easily do for, say, Usain Bolt. Or even chess players who have grading systems which show - the odd exception aside - a typical heyday which matches a professional athlete almost exactly. The mind and body are closer than we think.

Something physical, but not punishingly physical, like golf as opposed to tennis, might not be far off the mark as a comparison for Pop musicians. They can still be great at 35, still hack it till 45 (just about, although sentiment plays a huge part), but beyond that...

True greats like McCartney and Prince were no longer producing great work beyond 45 (which followed a decade of decline). It's even telling that Tom Waits' best efforts since have been belated releases of old stage scores.

But sentiment can override honest judgements for lifelong fans.

A better question might be just how aware are these artists of their flagging talents? Prince is exceptionally interesting on this question as despite the decline from his Purple Rain heyday, he could release an album of new material tomorrow that's just as good. It's all in the Vault. But he doesn't. Why? Does he genuinely believe AOA is better than something he could put together from the late 1980's, or is it a sense of 'fair play', pride, or some other reason entirely? I don't know. The fact that he tried to recreate that period with MPLS Sound, rather than just head to The Vault, is interesting too.

Ultimately, I believe that Prince believes he's still got it. He thinks he can head to the studio and party like it's 1999. He can't.

[Edited 3/6/15 4:43am]

McD said:

It's an interesting question... why Pop (as the most general term) musicians have a limited shelf life, compared to composers for orchestra who don't (and never have).

Music can't be scientifically judged in the same way we can easily do for, say, Usain Bolt. Or even chess players who have grading systems which show - the odd exception aside - a typical heyday which matches a professional athlete almost exactly. The mind and body are closer than we think.

Something physical, but not punishingly physical, like golf as opposed to tennis, might not be far off the mark as a comparison for Pop musicians. They can still be great at 35, still hack it till 45 (just about, although sentiment plays a huge part), but beyond that...

True greats like McCartney and Prince were no longer producing great work beyond 45 (which followed a decade of decline). It's even telling that Tom Waits' best efforts since have been belated releases of old stage scores.

But sentiment can override honest judgements for lifelong fans.

A better question might be just how aware are these artists of their flagging talents? Prince is exceptionally interesting on this question as despite the decline from his Purple Rain heyday, he could release an album of new material tomorrow that's just as good. It's all in the Vault. But he doesn't. Why? Does he genuinely believe AOA is better than something he could put together from the late 1980's, or is it a sense of 'fair play', pride, or some other reason entirely? I don't know. The fact that he tried to recreate that period with MPLS Sound, rather than just head to The Vault, is interesting too.

Ultimately, I believe that Prince believes he's still got it. He thinks he can head to the studio and party like it's 1999. He can't.

[Edited 3/6/15 4:43am]

To suggest Prince is not producing great work after 45 is pretty absurd. If we knew when all the songs were really written, you might have a better argument, but he's just guilty of putting crap songs on albums due to not knowing which songs are crap. Here is a guy who releases Jughead, and Daddy Pop, and does not release the original Old Friends 4 Sale, and in his mind, he thinks Jughead is superior. He thinks Tony M is a master rapper. When Tony rapped about Manure on My Name Is Prince, ol' Prince thought it was literary genius at work. He's stupid in that regard...

But Lotus Flow3r is a brilliant album. Sure, a few lesser tracks, but 3121 also had some awesome moments. If you can't see that...then you must live in Bart Van Halen world, where everything by older artists suck.

I'll say McCartney is not what he used to be, but he was 71 when New came out, and there are some really nice songs on it. Give it a listen, unless you are expecting the White Album...you're not gonna get that.

McD said:

It's an interesting question... why Pop (as the most general term) musicians have a limited shelf life, compared to composers for orchestra who don't (and never have).

Music can't be scientifically judged in the same way we can easily do for, say, Usain Bolt. Or even chess players who have grading systems which show - the odd exception aside - a typical heyday which matches a professional athlete almost exactly. The mind and body are closer than we think.

Something physical, but not punishingly physical, like golf as opposed to tennis, might not be far off the mark as a comparison for Pop musicians. They can still be great at 35, still hack it till 45 (just about, although sentiment plays a huge part), but beyond that...

True greats like McCartney and Prince were no longer producing great work beyond 45 (which followed a decade of decline). It's even telling that Tom Waits' best efforts since have been belated releases of old stage scores.

But sentiment can override honest judgements for lifelong fans.

A better question might be just how aware are these artists of their flagging talents? Prince is exceptionally interesting on this question as despite the decline from his Purple Rain heyday, he could release an album of new material tomorrow that's just as good. It's all in the Vault. But he doesn't. Why? Does he genuinely believe AOA is better than something he could put together from the late 1980's, or is it a sense of 'fair play', pride, or some other reason entirely? I don't know. The fact that he tried to recreate that period with MPLS Sound, rather than just head to The Vault, is interesting too.

Ultimately, I believe that Prince believes he's still got it. He thinks he can head to the studio and party like it's 1999. He can't.

[Edited 3/6/15 4:43am]

The bolded is certainly true here. And you are a troll for even hinting his best days are behind him.

Sentiment creates indelible lifelong beliefs and attachments that for better or worse, go hand in hand like hairdos and fashion way past their expiration date that some refuse to believe there could ever be better.

[Edited 3/6/15 15:28pm]

stillwaiting said:

McD said:

It's an interesting question... why Pop (as the most general term) musicians have a limited shelf life, compared to composers for orchestra who don't (and never have).

Music can't be scientifically judged in the same way we can easily do for, say, Usain Bolt. Or even chess players who have grading systems which show - the odd exception aside - a typical heyday which matches a professional athlete almost exactly. The mind and body are closer than we think.

Something physical, but not punishingly physical, like golf as opposed to tennis, might not be far off the mark as a comparison for Pop musicians. They can still be great at 35, still hack it till 45 (just about, although sentiment plays a huge part), but beyond that...

True greats like McCartney and Prince were no longer producing great work beyond 45 (which followed a decade of decline). It's even telling that Tom Waits' best efforts since have been belated releases of old stage scores.

But sentiment can override honest judgements for lifelong fans.

A better question might be just how aware are these artists of their flagging talents? Prince is exceptionally interesting on this question as despite the decline from his Purple Rain heyday, he could release an album of new material tomorrow that's just as good. It's all in the Vault. But he doesn't. Why? Does he genuinely believe AOA is better than something he could put together from the late 1980's, or is it a sense of 'fair play', pride, or some other reason entirely? I don't know. The fact that he tried to recreate that period with MPLS Sound, rather than just head to The Vault, is interesting too.

Ultimately, I believe that Prince believes he's still got it. He thinks he can head to the studio and party like it's 1999. He can't.

[Edited 3/6/15 4:43am]

To suggest Prince is not producing great work after 45 is pretty absurd. If we knew when all the songs were really written, you might have a better argument, but he's just guilty of putting crap songs on albums due to not knowing which songs are crap. Here is a guy who releases Jughead, and Daddy Pop, and does not release the original Old Friends 4 Sale, and in his mind, he thinks Jughead is superior. He thinks Tony M is a master rapper. When Tony rapped about Manure on My Name Is Prince, ol' Prince thought it was literary genius at work. He's stupid in that regard...

But Lotus Flow3r is a brilliant album. Sure, a few lesser tracks, but 3121 also had some awesome moments. If you can't see that...then you must live in Bart Van Halen world, where everything by older artists suck.

I'll say McCartney is not what he used to be, but he was 71 when New came out, and there are some really nice songs on it. Give it a listen, unless you are expecting the White Album...you're not gonna get that.

You hit it on the head and the point of my original post, Prince at 56 is producing foward thinking and excellent work....excellent....if people aren't really listening to PlecElect its their loss. This is an important moment in his career and he is maturing nicely and not looking to reproduce 1999 or Controversy or SOTT or the Gold Experience. He is moving foward with new ideas and energy....he is maturing in a more productive (at least artistically) way compared to other 70s,80s vanguard musicians.

Still Waiting...nice one I didn't even catch the "Brett Van Halen" blast on the first read. And what is there music like these days? How are they maturing....specifically Eddie!

[Edited 3/6/15 17:45pm]