Ok. Really?

Do we need more of this HitNRun "belittlement" (is that the right word - sorry I'm danish)....


And. You shouldn't compare Prince to others, he is in his own league, always has been, (haha).

HITNRUN is fantastic, so many really good songs, this new album does not deserve to be "trashed" or "belittled" like that here.. day in day out, does it - not imo.

And also, I really like Art Official Age as well.

So many harsh comments everywhere. Lets disagree about the new album then, I like his new direction.. I believe it's good.. for a moment, then he can do something else for phase 2, right?


But, the HITNRUN album keeps getting better with every listening.

[Edited 9/9/15 4:46am]

thedance said:

Paul McCartney - Flaming Pie (1997ish)? Pretty strong work which, like HitnRun, referenced his past, albeit more skillfully, & McCartney has had a number of equally interesting releases since.

[Edited 9/9/15 5:19am]

LittlePurpleYoda said:

KingSausage said:

LittlePurpleYoda said:

Paul McCartney - Flaming Pie (1997ish)? Pretty strong work which, like HitnRun, referenced his past, albeit more skillfully, & McCartney has had a number of equally interesting releases since.

[Edited 9/9/15 5:19am]

Interesting. I've never heard it. I'll check it out!

It followed shortly after the Anthology series, which may be the reason for the lookback, but it also featured some production assistance by Jeff Lynne of ELO (who helped with those Beatles' songs like Free As A Bird). Calico Skies is a pretty sweet ballad with an anti-war message, the title track is a reference to something John once said, The World Tonight & The Song We Were Singing are a couple of other strong tracks.

I think it's pathetic when anyone with his level of talent and stature tries to sound like Kary Perry.

NouveauDance said:

I haven't heard HitnRun, but I hope to get it on cd at some point. If not, oh well. Dylan's Time Out of Mind is a brilliant cd. Incredible songs and lyrics.

KingSausage said:

In commenting on HITNRUN, a lot of Orgers are saying things like "it's great that Prince sounds so fresh and is challenging himself when he's 57. What other artist has done that?" Let's compare Prince and HITNRUN to what other major artists were doing at that age, or as close to 57 as possible. Dylan: Time Out of Mind (1997). This album smokes the shit out of HITNRUN. Stones: Bridges to Babylon (1997). Pretty weak. But stronger than HITNRUN, especially the Keith songs. Bowie: Reality (2003). No contest. Reality is a great album. Springsteen: Magic (2007). Again, no contest. Magic has some fantastic songs. Stevie: A Time 2 Love (2005?). I don't think this is a great album, but it's much better than HITNRUN. Any others?

I would take Magic any day of the week over Shits'n'Runs

NorthC said:

NouveauDance said:

I think it's pathetic when anyone with his level of talent and stature tries to sound like Kary Perry.

Tina Turner - Wildest Dreams 1996 - Age: 57

Neil Diamond released the terrific (and pretty much universally praised) 12 Songs in 2005, when he was 64.

Of course, Rick Rubin produced that one. Prince would never have a producer who wasn't in awe of him, so we get HITNRUN.

KingSausage said:

thedance said:

Ok. Really?

Do we need more of this HitNRun "belittlement" (is that the right word - sorry I'm danish)....


And. You shouldn't compare Prince to others, he is in his own league, always has been, (haha).

HITNRUN is fantastic, so many really good songs, this new album does not deserve to be "trashed" or "belittled" like that here.. day in day out, does it - not imo.

And also, I really like Art Official Age as well.

So many harsh comments everywhere. Lets disagree about the new album then, I like his new direction.. I believe it's good.. for a moment, then he can do something else for phase 2, right?


But, the HITNRUN album keeps getting better with every listening.

[Edited 9/9/15 4:46am]

This isn't just a HITNRUN bashing thread. It's a discussion of what Prince is doing at 57 compared to other artists around that age. Why, you ask? Because defenders of HITNRUN keep saying that Prince should be admired for putting out such a strong and innovative album at 57, and questioning what other artist has done so. It's a totally fair comparison. You like HITNRUN. We both liked AOA. I'd like to hear your comparison of HITNRUN and Prince in general to other artists at 57.

It's a not so thinly disguised bashing thread though isn't it? Especially as you were saying all the listed albums were better than Hitnrun. But it's all personal taste and opinion. I think Dylan sounds terrible and can't listen to him. Does that make his art shit? Are any of these albums doing anything different to what the artists have done before? Does that make any of it bad or good?

For what it's worth I prefer Hitnrun to all of those albums you listed. Does that mean those other albums are bad? No, it just means I don't personally like them.

HOW ABOUT WE COMPARE REBEL HEART AND HITNRUN?

THEY ARE CONTEMPORARIES....FROM THE SAME POP RAINBOW ATTEMPTING TO BE THE COOL OLD PEOPLE ....in the same year no less.

I tried to like rebel heart, living for love and ghost town were the only two that were listenable.

the rest --- i tries to get through it but it was not musical. i can't even describe how it didnt sound like music to me.

TheEnglishGent said:

Just one thing, reading this thread I realize I understand better why there's so much disgust for P's music after 1995 on this forum.

.

I read those names so often here: Bowie, Dylan, Springsteen, McCartney, The Rolling Stones, Kate Bush and even now Neil Diamond and Pixies...

.

I mean seriously? On a Prince forum?Don't get me wrong I'm in love with Kate Bush and I like David Bowie a lot and I even happen to dig Pixies but that's mostly because my pals were so much into it when I was in hi skool and their music is part of my history. But I wouldn't ever go anywhere near a Springsteen, McCartney, Diamond, The Stones or Dylan album. Again don't get me wrong, it's not that I don't think they're talented, it's just folk and rock and blues and therefore not my thang even though I'll dig a rock/folk/blues thing every once in a while.

.

I'm basically into Black music (jazz, funk, hip-hop, you name it), synthpop/post-punk/new wave and electronic music and all its subgenres (from house to trip-hop to ambient to drumnbass and so on), and overall I dig P's post WB music a lot.

.

Before being on the Org I assumed on a Prince forum people would talk James Brown and George Clinton and Cameo and Public Enemy and John Coltrane all day. I assumed they'd be into Björk and Tricky and Felix Da Housecat and Chicks On Speed and that they'd go dancing to house music in clubs on week-ends.

.

I really didn't think I'd hear about Paul McCartney every day But yeah, I think if I was into McCartney or Spingsteen or Dylan etc., yeah, I'd probably hate most of what P has released since 96. makes sense to me.

.

I think Prince's music, past the 80's, is mostly aimed at people who're into Black music, synthpop and electronica. As discussed in a recent thread funk afficionados usually LOVE Newpower Soul while most orgers hate it. On the other hand when I read rave reviews about a lo-fi acoustic blues song like Indifference I'm a bit like WTF? Prince fans bitch on Chocolate Box or Lavaux, but rave about an acoustic lo-fi song?

.

I think at some point Prince achieved his dream of crossing over so much that he attracted a whole crowd of people who actually listen to things that have nothing to do with what he does in substance, and those people made a good half of his hardcore fanbase. The substance of what P does has never changed ever since 1978. Other orgers who are a lot into funk and/or electronica, know that and have acknowledged it.

.

It's a casting error, a bit as if the Stones had made a fanbase out of funkateers when they went through their disco phase with Miss You, and then when they're back to good ol' rock n roll the fans'd complain that the Stones are so not funky anymore. Fuck no they ain't, they never were meant to be funky.

.

For one Lotusflow3r Prince will always release 5 Mplsound, because in subtance what he does is Mplasound, not Lotusflow3r.

.

Why Dylan and Mccartney fans held on to Prince all those years (though in disgust), is what I don't get

KingSausage said:

TheEnglishGent said:

It's a not so thinly disguised bashing thread though isn't it? Especially as you were saying all the listed albums were better than Hitnrun. But it's all personal taste and opinion. I think Dylan sounds terrible and can't listen to him. Does that make his art shit? Are any of these albums doing anything different to what the artists have done before? Does that make any of it bad or good?

For what it's worth I prefer Hitnrun to all of those albums you listed. Does that mean those other albums are bad? No, it just means I don't personally like them.

It's not a thinly disguised bashing thread. It's a response to a point people keep making here. You raise an interesting question about whether the albums I mentioned are doing anything different. I'd say Time Out of Mind most definitely was, and this was a major factor behind all its praise. Bridges to Babylon? God no. The Stones haven't done anything truly different for ages. Bowie's Reality? Not really. Is "different" good or bad? It depends. I prefer different to more of the same when it comes to legendary artists. It prevents things from getting boring. But I think some people (not you, English) confuse different with innovative. HITNRUN is clearly different for Prince. It's not innovative.

The discussion is interesting, but this thread wouldn't exist if you'd enjoyed Hitnrun . But you're right about one thing, Hitnrun is definitely not innovative. I am enjoying it rather a lot though.

databank said:

.

Why Dylan and Mccartney fans held on to Prince all those years (though in disgust), is what I don't get

It's called depth, honey. You should try it, sometime.

You can like whatever kind of music you like, but your own post suggests you don't dig very deeply. "I'm basically into Black music" - really? That's it? Some of us come at this from a different background - I studied music as a kid, playing mostly classical until I was in my teens. In college, I listened to Bach's Art of Fugue if I was having trouble going to sleep. I grew up with parents who listened to classical and folk and standards and musicals - and passed all of that on to me. I was watching Ed Sullivan when The Beatles made their first US appearance in 1964. I listened to Marvin Gaye and Al Green in equal measure with Led Zeppelin and the Moody Blues in the 70s. I found Prince in the early 80s and have everything he's ever released (and a huge amount of stuff that he hasn't).

What ties Prince to Dylan and McCartney and Diamond (and hell - even Gershwin and Porter) is song writing. I realize that's an odd concept in these days of EDM and pop crap, but there it is.

Genesia said:

TheEnglishGent said:

KingSausage said:

thedance said: This isn't just a HITNRUN bashing thread. It's a discussion of what Prince is doing at 57 compared to other artists around that age. Why, you ask? Because defenders of HITNRUN keep saying that Prince should be admired for putting out such a strong and innovative album at 57, and questioning what other artist has done so. It's a totally fair comparison. You like HITNRUN. We both liked AOA. I'd like to hear your comparison of HITNRUN and Prince in general to other artists at 57.

It's a not so thinly disguised bashing thread though isn't it? Especially as you were saying all the listed albums were better than Hitnrun. But it's all personal taste and opinion. I think Dylan sounds terrible and can't listen to him. Does that make his art shit? Are any of these albums doing anything different to what the artists have done before? Does that make any of it bad or good?

For what it's worth I prefer Hitnrun to all of those albums you listed. Does that mean those other albums are bad? No, it just means I don't personally like them.

The original post asks a perfectly valid question - respected artists at the same point in their careers & what their creative output looks like at roughly the same period? That's not bashing. You're free to agree or disagree. While I think the McCartney album I mentioned is vastly superior to HitnRun, as has been much of Paul's output over the last several years to anything Prince has released & Bowie's Reality CD beats it easily, I actually think the Stones' Bridges to Babylon, even if it is by-the-numbers Stones, is still better than Prince by the numbers. Yes, in Flip The Switch it had the obligatory 3 word song title (see previous Start Me Up, Sparks Will Fly, etc.), but Out of Control & Saint of Me are good late period tracks, rock pretty hard live & Anybody Seen My Baby was an interesting video. The album did feature their silly venture into rap, however.

What's wrong with making a comparison? And frankly, who cares what someone else would or wouldn't go near? It should be obvious that we're all here for different reasons - personally, I think Prince's best work is long behind him, but I still hope I might hear something interesting & that one day the vault might open. And we all are interested in other artists - databank & I might both like Prince, but I couldn't give a rat's ass that he doesn't like Paul McCartney.

KingSausage said:

In commenting on HITNRUN, a lot of Orgers are saying things like "it's great that Prince sounds so fresh and is challenging himself when he's 57. What other artist has done that?" Let's compare Prince and HITNRUN to what other major artists were doing at that age, or as close to 57 as possible. Dylan: Time Out of Mind (1997). This album smokes the shit out of HITNRUN. Stones: Bridges to Babylon (1997). Pretty weak. But stronger than HITNRUN, especially the Keith songs. Bowie: Reality (2003). No contest. Reality is a great album. Springsteen: Magic (2007). Again, no contest. Magic has some fantastic songs. Stevie: A Time 2 Love (2005?). I don't think this is a great album, but it's much better than HITNRUN. Any others?

They probably are all better albums... But one thing... None of them with those albums ever stepped so diversely out of their musical comfort zone as Prince has. I love Rolling Stones, but their sound is the same with every album...

HitnRun is not a good album IMO... But as an artist PRINCE still shows he can go to different musical styles. I mean funk from jazz to soul to pop to rock to an EDM/DUBSTEP... Good or not, PRINCE is still the only one that can cover that much musical depth from album to album. The unfortunate part is the past 10 or so more years his output has not been strong because his musical creativity and experiment sometimes overshadows his overall concept to put out a solid album which in many case in order to please the fans is going back to his "roots".

LittlePurpleYoda said:

TheEnglishGent said:

It's a not so thinly disguised bashing thread though isn't it? Especially as you were saying all the listed albums were better than Hitnrun. But it's all personal taste and opinion. I think Dylan sounds terrible and can't listen to him. Does that make his art shit? Are any of these albums doing anything different to what the artists have done before? Does that make any of it bad or good?

For what it's worth I prefer Hitnrun to all of those albums you listed. Does that mean those other albums are bad? No, it just means I don't personally like them.

The original post asks a perfectly valid question - respected artists at the same point in their careers & what their creative output looks like at roughly the same period? That's not bashing. You're free to agree or disagree. While I think the McCartney album I mentioned is vastly superior to HitnRun, as has been much of Paul's output over the last several years to anything Prince has released & Bowie's Reality CD beats it easily, I actually think the Stones' Bridges to Babylon, even if it is by-the-numbers Stones, is still better than Prince by the numbers. Yes, in Flip The Switch it had the obligatory 3 word song title (see previous Start Me Up, Sparks Will Fly, etc.), but Out of Control & Saint of Me are good late period tracks, rock pretty hard live & Anybody Seen My Baby was an interesting video. The album did feature their silly venture into rap, however.

What's wrong with making a comparison? And frankly, who cares what someone else would or wouldn't go near? It should be obvious that we're all here for different reasons - personally, I think Prince's best work is long behind him, but I still hope I might hear something interesting & that one day the vault might open. And we all are interested in other artists - databank & I might both like Prince, but I couldn't give a rat's ass that he doesn't like Paul McCartney.

I really don't think it's a matter of which is better or worse. Those albums are great because they are mature works by mature artists making music for grownups. Masters at the top of their game who've given up trying to top the charts. Madonna and Prince are still trying to reach the teenagers. There's something inauthentic about that. The music may be good (I like HNR), but it just feels off, like an emeritus History professor in yoga pants.

AhPook said:

LittlePurpleYoda said:

The original post asks a perfectly valid question - respected artists at the same point in their careers & what their creative output looks like at roughly the same period? That's not bashing. You're free to agree or disagree. While I think the McCartney album I mentioned is vastly superior to HitnRun, as has been much of Paul's output over the last several years to anything Prince has released & Bowie's Reality CD beats it easily, I actually think the Stones' Bridges to Babylon, even if it is by-the-numbers Stones, is still better than Prince by the numbers. Yes, in Flip The Switch it had the obligatory 3 word song title (see previous Start Me Up, Sparks Will Fly, etc.), but Out of Control & Saint of Me are good late period tracks, rock pretty hard live & Anybody Seen My Baby was an interesting video. The album did feature their silly venture into rap, however.

What's wrong with making a comparison? And frankly, who cares what someone else would or wouldn't go near? It should be obvious that we're all here for different reasons - personally, I think Prince's best work is long behind him, but I still hope I might hear something interesting & that one day the vault might open. And we all are interested in other artists - databank & I might both like Prince, but I couldn't give a rat's ass that he doesn't like Paul McCartney.

I really don't think it's a matter of which is better or worse. Those albums are great because they are mature works by mature artists making music for grownups. Masters at the top of their game who've given up trying to top the charts. Madonna and Prince are still trying to reach the teenagers. There's something inauthentic about that. The music may be good (I like HNR), but it just feels off, like an emeritus History professor in yoga pants.

Well put. I have to say, though - there are plenty of emeritus history professors in yoga pants and bike shorts where I live. It more than "feels off" - it is deeply disturbing.

AhPook said:

LittlePurpleYoda said:

The original post asks a perfectly valid question - respected artists at the same point in their careers & what their creative output looks like at roughly the same period? That's not bashing. You're free to agree or disagree. While I think the McCartney album I mentioned is vastly superior to HitnRun, as has been much of Paul's output over the last several years to anything Prince has released & Bowie's Reality CD beats it easily, I actually think the Stones' Bridges to Babylon, even if it is by-the-numbers Stones, is still better than Prince by the numbers. Yes, in Flip The Switch it had the obligatory 3 word song title (see previous Start Me Up, Sparks Will Fly, etc.), but Out of Control & Saint of Me are good late period tracks, rock pretty hard live & Anybody Seen My Baby was an interesting video. The album did feature their silly venture into rap, however.

What's wrong with making a comparison? And frankly, who cares what someone else would or wouldn't go near? It should be obvious that we're all here for different reasons - personally, I think Prince's best work is long behind him, but I still hope I might hear something interesting & that one day the vault might open. And we all are interested in other artists - databank & I might both like Prince, but I couldn't give a rat's ass that he doesn't like Paul McCartney.

I really don't think it's a matter of which is better or worse. Those albums are great because they are mature works by mature artists making music for grownups. Masters at the top of their game who've given up trying to top the charts. Madonna and Prince are still trying to reach the teenagers. There's something inauthentic about that. The music may be good (I like HNR), but it just feels off, like an emeritus History professor in yoga pants.

Yes. Its like they are in a race to see who can be the first to actually get a hit with younger people. I can't hate them for trying, even if its clumsy.