michael jackson is more infamous, than he is famous...

that has more to do with his penchant for destroying his facial features and doing the nasty with little boys, and less to do with the music and youtube videos...

MotownSubdivision said:

He can obviously do whatever he pleases with his music but that doesn't mean that whatever he does is a good idea.

.

Amen!

The reason that Prince keeps doing these deals and insisting on upfront payments is because he knows that if he tries to sell the stuff himself and rely on the strength of the material to make money then he'll end up broke pretty quickly without promoting the fuck out of it (which he doesn't seem inclined to do).

Not to mention the fact that a lot of the material over the last 10-15 years hasn't really been strong enough to sell that much even if he did (and I suspect he knows that).

If your main focus is getting the music out to as many people as possible then you should release it on every platform that you can. If however you wanna make some money then you have to put out stuff that people are willing to pay for.

The fact of the matter is, any song or video these days is basically just data and it costs $0.00 to copy data from one place to another. Back when the only way you could hear a song was on vinyl, then the vinyl producers could control the cost of music. But now that copying music is essentially free, the same music has a much lower value to the music buying public. That's just an economic reality that all musicians have to deal with. People do still pay for music (even young people) but it has to be at a fair price and on whatever medium that suits them.

Back to the question at hand though, is he right to disengage from Youtube? Not right for me but it looks like it's right for him. How it'll affect his legacy, only time will tell but he certainly isn't doing much to get on the radar of the newer generations of music lovers.

RJOrion said:

michael jackson is more infamous, than he is famous...

that has more to do with his penchant for destroying his facial features and doing the nasty with little boys, and less to do with the music and youtube videos...

Typical response.

Get some new material.

[Edited 10/3/15 8:30am]

Thizz said:

What if he uploaded his music to YouTube and sold advertisment space on each upload

That would certainly be an innovative approach

You're playing fast and loose with the term innovative. Since that's already what YouTube does. Plus you're still talking pennies.

MotownSubdivision said:

RJOrion said:

michael jackson is more infamous, than he is famous...

that has more to do with his penchant for destroying his facial features and doing the nasty with little boys, and less to do with the music and youtube videos...

Typical response.

Get some new material.

[Edited 10/3/15 8:30am]

i wish i could, but his enduring legacy is what it is... who am i to alter history?...when someone mentions how famous Michael Jackson STILL is, that has to be taken into account...

when Michael's legacy is discussed, people rarely discuss anything other than the negative...not so for prince...

MotownSubdivision said:

I'm just going to say this: why is Michael Jackson still one of the most famous people in the world? Why are there countless kids of this generation who are so familiar with a now-deceased artist whose peak of popularity was 20-30 years before they were born and whose last album came out around the time or several years before they were born? It isn't the only reason why but his catalog being widely available on YouTube definitely helps to keep his legacy glowing. Prince is damn foolish to not be taking advantage of such a platform and refusing to get with the times. He can obviously do whatever he pleases with his music but that doesn't mean that whatever he does is a good idea.

But in the case of Jackson you're talking about someone who pioneered the music video in a way Prince never did. Plus he's dead. You can't compare the two. There is nowhere near the same adoraton placed on Prince's videography.

Also Prince isn't dead. So he doesn't have a legacy. He has a back catalog which he seems intent on being paid for, as long as he remains alive.

Again - nobody is actually being denied access to his videography. It is online.

RJOrion said:

Noodled24 said:

BartVanHemelen said:

- we should be on the third or fourth round of remastered and expanded releases by now.

- We should have had DVDs and CDs of multiple "classic" gigs, and Prince should be sitting on a huge pile of money in return.

1- I'd disagree with this one...albeit that there's probably enough material there to justify a multi-level re-issue for most albums e.g. a 2 CD Deluxe Edition and a x-CD Super Deluxe for the hard core crazies! Personally, I'd feel I was getting ripped off if I was buying a "new" Purple Rain every 5 years!

2 - completely agree. The Springsteen and Rolling Stones "archive" releases would appear to offer a good template which Prince could follow...and I'd be hammering my credit card to keep up with pretty much any releases in this vein.

hw3004 said:

Vannormal said:

hw3004 said:

1- I'd disagree with this one...albeit that there's probably enough material there to justify a multi-level re-issue for most albums e.g. a 2 CD Deluxe Edition and a x-CD Super Deluxe for the hard core crazies! Personally, I'd feel I was getting ripped off if I was buying a "new" Purple Rain every 5 years!

2 - completely agree. The Springsteen and Rolling Stones "archive" releases would appear to offer a good template which Prince could follow...and I'd be hammering my credit card to keep up with pretty much any releases in this vein.

Maybe all true, but you are all forgetting one thing : If Prince gives in to this kind of releases he is isn't relevant anymore. He will be 'old' and a has been, and I guess that's what he's mostly afraid off. He's dying to be accepted by contemporaries and the current music business. He wants to try and stand out on many levels, like stating that either the Internet is dead, or that albums aren't relevant anymore, and then again showing up on several internet sites, and disappearing again, and coming back again, trying to be relevant on Tidal or whatever... Of course it's all about $$, but not necessarily connected with re-releases or vault releases. And on the other hand, this guy knows his music isn't what it used to be, but it's the only thing he lives to die for. And the old formulas is the only thing he really loves : albums, singles, performing live, whatever... He remains prolific and records still a lot, but he's got lost a bit, and doesn't like to admit to it. Working with new younger people is too little and too late. Afro or not, Prince lost it quite a bit. I think religion fanaticism really fucked the best out of him. We will only see vault shit and remasters when he's dead and gone. Or, WB should pay the shit out of them for it to get a remaster release. Something where Prince wants them to get pretty hurt, and he can shit bucked loads of money from it. [Edited 10/5/15 9:24am]

Relevant to who?

If you're using relevant as short-hand for "relevant to young people with mainstream tastes" then he's not been relevant for at least 20+ years....which isn't necessarily a criticism. Music is arguably much more diverse than it's ever been (ironically, given the homogenisation of the "mainstream"). Just because he's not relevant doesn't necessarily make him a has been...and the archive releases (which would be relatively niche) could easily run parallel to releases of new material.

I do agree that Prince has become less interesting artistically as his religious stance became more dogmatic, but how much of that has been a result of issues in his personal life? Which begs, should an artist be / does an artist need to be unhappy to create interesting work...and if they do, what does that say about the audience?

hw3004 said:

BartVanHemelen said:

- we should be on the third or fourth round of remastered and expanded releases by now.

- We should have had DVDs and CDs of multiple "classic" gigs, and Prince should be sitting on a huge pile of money in return.

1- I'd disagree with this one...albeit that there's probably enough material there to justify a multi-level re-issue for most albums e.g. a 2 CD Deluxe Edition and a x-CD Super Deluxe for the hard core crazies! Personally, I'd feel I was getting ripped off if I was buying a "new" Purple Rain every 5 years!

2 - completely agree. The Springsteen and Rolling Stones "archive" releases would appear to offer a good template which Prince could follow...and I'd be hammering my credit card to keep up with pretty much any releases in this vein.

.

Look, the multiple rounds is just par for the course. Look at how often the same few Bowie records get re-mastered and re-released. Technology advances, new formats become available, etc.

.

But in the case of Prince, he could have offered new bonus features each time: newly discovered concert recordings, full-length versions, outtakes, rehearsal recordings, etc. He could have started of with an "album + released alternate versions + B-sides" set, then a couple of years later offer a set with outtakes and perhaps a DVD of the Syracuse concert, then a few years later he'd add the 1984 Birthday gig and the concert where PR was recorded etc. And that's just Purple Rain! Pace those releases and combine them with less frequent "new" music releases, and you have a lucrative business.

.

But waiting for that elusive offer WRT the vault? Ain't gonna happen, especially not with a music industry that isn't getting richer and a dwindling fan base. Nobody's going to pay Prince stupid money for his back catalogue + vault, especially not when he's probably going to be a bitch about it and perhaps actively try to sabotage it.

BartVanHemelen said:

hw3004 said:

1- I'd disagree with this one...albeit that there's probably enough material there to justify a multi-level re-issue for most albums e.g. a 2 CD Deluxe Edition and a x-CD Super Deluxe for the hard core crazies! Personally, I'd feel I was getting ripped off if I was buying a "new" Purple Rain every 5 years!

2 - completely agree. The Springsteen and Rolling Stones "archive" releases would appear to offer a good template which Prince could follow...and I'd be hammering my credit card to keep up with pretty much any releases in this vein.

.

Look, the multiple rounds is just par for the course. Look at how often the same few Bowie records get re-mastered and re-released. Technology advances, new formats become available, etc.

.

But in the case of Prince, he could have offered new bonus features each time: newly discovered concert recordings, full-length versions, outtakes, rehearsal recordings, etc. He could have started of with an "album + released alternate versions + B-sides" set, then a couple of years later offer a set with outtakes and perhaps a DVD of the Syracuse concert, then a few years later he'd add the 1984 Birthday gig and the concert where PR was recorded etc. And that's just Purple Rain! Pace those releases and combine them with less frequent "new" music releases, and you have a lucrative business.

.

But waiting for that elusive offer WRT the vault? Ain't gonna happen, especially not with a music industry that isn't getting richer and a dwindling fan base. Nobody's going to pay Prince stupid money for his back catalogue + vault, especially not when he's probably going to be a bitch about it and perhaps actively try to sabotage it.

Well said , thats just a dream.

BartVanHemelen said:

hw3004 said:

1- I'd disagree with this one...albeit that there's probably enough material there to justify a multi-level re-issue for most albums e.g. a 2 CD Deluxe Edition and a x-CD Super Deluxe for the hard core crazies! Personally, I'd feel I was getting ripped off if I was buying a "new" Purple Rain every 5 years!

2 - completely agree. The Springsteen and Rolling Stones "archive" releases would appear to offer a good template which Prince could follow...and I'd be hammering my credit card to keep up with pretty much any releases in this vein.

.

Look, the multiple rounds is just par for the course. Look at how often the same few Bowie records get re-mastered and re-released. Technology advances, new formats become available, etc.

.

But in the case of Prince, he could have offered new bonus features each time: newly discovered concert recordings, full-length versions, outtakes, rehearsal recordings, etc. He could have started of with an "album + released alternate versions + B-sides" set, then a couple of years later offer a set with outtakes and perhaps a DVD of the Syracuse concert, then a few years later he'd add the 1984 Birthday gig and the concert where PR was recorded etc. And that's just Purple Rain! Pace those releases and combine them with less frequent "new" music releases, and you have a lucrative business.

.

But waiting for that elusive offer WRT the vault? Ain't gonna happen, especially not with a music industry that isn't getting richer and a dwindling fan base. Nobody's going to pay Prince stupid money for his back catalogue + vault, especially not when he's probably going to be a bitch about it and perhaps actively try to sabotage it.

Fair enough, it is par for the course but I still think it's a rip-off, although arguably that's just my perception. I'd be far happy buying the extra's you're suggesting as individual packages whereas, not entirely rationally, if each were marketed as re-issues of PR, I'd be moaning about it...not entirely rationally, I admit!

But, as you suggest, the lack of re-issues does, on the face of it seems a strange decision, although, I couldn't help think of Prince when reading an article on the superdeluxeedition website on the "politics" of re-issues. The relevant section being...

"I guess you can’t blame some acts for being reluctant to re-engage with former labels – there could be all sorts of unresolved issues. They might be still bearing a grudge for that ‘under promoted’ album that the label didn’t get behind or a decade of ill-thought out ‘greatest hits’ compilations they had no knowledge of. On the flip-side of that coin the label may consider the artist ‘unrecouped’, where a flop album didn’t earn enough to even payback the advance, so the label were left in the red. Or it could be a lot worse than that – such as the situation with Holly Johnson and ZTT Records where he had to sue them to release himself from his contract. Why is he suddenly going to help his old label promote a reissue? (he did actually do some promotion for Universal’s Frankie Say compilation, but that was purely in return for seeing some of his solo albums back in print).

Then there is the I’m-a-multi-millionaire-now-so-why-am-I-bothered factor.Sting is probably a member of that club. He has sold billions of records, he’s on a world tour that will earn him tens of millions of pounds and he likes to spend time on projects close to his heart like The Last Ship. But please could he stop everything to get involved in a reissue that might sell 30k copies and earn him next to nothing. Er, no thanks. Hence we haven’t seen a 30th anniversary Dream of the Blue Turtles reissue and none of The Police‘s albums have ever been celebrated with individual deluxe or super deluxe sets.

Everyone’s different. Paul McCartney is richer than Sting (and just as busy) but he perhaps feels like some of his past work is either misunderstood or under appreciated. So he wants to spend time and effort on re-presentation. 1971’s RAM was famously dismissed by Rolling Stone as “the nadir in the decomposition of Sixties rock” but 40 years later when lovingly reissued as a 5-disc deluxe set critics were a hell of a lot kinder too it. He’s about to do the same thing again with Tug of War and Pipes of Peace."

Maybe, one day.....

hw3004 said:

But, as you suggest, the lack of re-issues does, on the face of it seems a strange decision, although, I couldn't help think of Prince when reading an article on the superdeluxeedition website on the "politics" of re-issues. The relevant section being...

"I guess you can’t blame some acts for being reluctant to re-engage with former labels – there could be all sorts of unresolved issues. They might be still bearing a grudge for that ‘under promoted’ album that the label didn’t get behind or a decade of ill-thought out ‘greatest hits’ compilations they had no knowledge of. On the flip-side of that coin the label may consider the artist ‘unrecouped’, where a flop album didn’t earn enough to even payback the advance, so the label were left in the red. Or it could be a lot worse than that – such as the situation with Holly Johnson and ZTT Records where he had to sue them to release himself from his contract. Why is he suddenly going to help his old label promote a reissue? (he did actually do some promotion for Universal’s Frankie Say compilation, but that was purely in return for seeing some of his solo albums back in print).

Then there is the I’m-a-multi-millionaire-now-so-why-am-I-bothered factor.Sting is probably a member of that club. He has sold billions of records, he’s on a world tour that will earn him tens of millions of pounds and he likes to spend time on projects close to his heart like The Last Ship. But please could he stop everything to get involved in a reissue that might sell 30k copies and earn him next to nothing. Er, no thanks. Hence we haven’t seen a 30th anniversary Dream of the Blue Turtles reissue and none of The Police‘s albums have ever been celebrated with individual deluxe or super deluxe sets.

Everyone’s different. Paul McCartney is richer than Sting (and just as busy) but he perhaps feels like some of his past work is either misunderstood or under appreciated. So he wants to spend time and effort on re-presentation. 1971’s RAM was famously dismissed by Rolling Stone as “the nadir in the decomposition of Sixties rock” but 40 years later when lovingly reissued as a 5-disc deluxe set critics were a hell of a lot kinder too it. He’s about to do the same thing again with Tug of War and Pipes of Peace."

Maybe, one day.....

.

I've always said that Prince needed to renegociate his 1992 contract instead of throwing a temper tantrum, and part of that renegociation would have been remasters + expanded editions. Last year's announcement seemed to be sort-of that resolution, except of course the PR Deluxe didn't happen, probably due to Prince's sabotage.

.

In the end, we're all screwed. We aren't getting great music from the vaults, WBR ain't getting profits, and Prince ain't earning money from a vault that is ever-decreasing in value. Fifteen years ago expanded albums were a minor hype, and while these days deluxe editions still come with plenty of good sales and lots of attention if done well they're doing nowhere near the business. Which means that the cost vs reward of doing such a release gets increasingly worse over time.

.

There are some other articles on SDE where he discusses what is involved in a remaster (check the recent article about A-Ha reissues, or the one about his involvement with the Paul Young box set), and it is mind-boggling. The longer Prince waits, the less relevant it becomes, and the less chance that someone will fund the necessary effort to unearth all that material and give it the proper love.

.

Quite frankly I doub't we'll ever see decent remasters of his entire 1980s output (i.e. including the various released edits and mixes, plus the various protege acts and all of their releases), and I fear we have to abandon hope of ever getting soundboard recordings etc. If you've got boots, cherish them because I don't see any viable way of ever getting most of what's on there released officially. Unless some billionaire is willing to spend stupid money on such a project and fulfill Prince's undoubtedly idiotic demands.

BartVanHemelen said:

Quite frankly I doub't we'll ever see decent remasters of his entire 1980s output (i.e. including the various released edits and mixes, plus the various protege acts and all of their releases), and I fear we have to abandon hope of ever getting soundboard recordings etc. If you've got boots, cherish them because I don't see any viable way of ever getting most of what's on there released officially. Unless some billionaire is willing to spend stupid money on such a project and fulfill Prince's undoubtedly idiotic demands.

....maybe we should start a crowdfunding campaign!

BartVanHemelen said:

hw3004 said:

1- I'd disagree with this one...albeit that there's probably enough material there to justify a multi-level re-issue for most albums e.g. a 2 CD Deluxe Edition and a x-CD Super Deluxe for the hard core crazies! Personally, I'd feel I was getting ripped off if I was buying a "new" Purple Rain every 5 years!

2 - completely agree. The Springsteen and Rolling Stones "archive" releases would appear to offer a good template which Prince could follow...and I'd be hammering my credit card to keep up with pretty much any releases in this vein.

.

Look, the multiple rounds is just par for the course. Look at how often the same few Bowie records get re-mastered and re-released. Technology advances, new formats become available, etc.

Technology hasn't advance to such a degree that multiple remasters are need. If an artist has 4 re-masters of the same album inside a 20 year period. That's a shameless cash-in with very little audible difference.

But in the case of Prince, he could have offered new bonus features each time: newly discovered concert recordings, full-length versions, outtakes, rehearsal recordings, etc. He could have started of with an "album + released alternate versions + B-sides" set, then a couple of years later offer a set with outtakes and perhaps a DVD of the Syracuse concert, then a few years later he'd add the 1984 Birthday gig and the concert where PR was recorded etc. And that's just Purple Rain! Pace those releases and combine them with less frequent "new" music releases, and you have a lucrative business.

So stop releasing new music and just keep churning out Purple Rain re-masters with "bonus" crap fans have had for years?

But waiting for that elusive offer WRT the vault? Ain't gonna happen, especially not with a music industry that isn't getting richer and a dwindling fan base. Nobody's going to pay Prince stupid money for his back catalogue + vault, especially not when he's probably going to be a bitch about it and perhaps actively try to sabotage it.

If that's the case - then who is the audience for the multiple re-masters you're proposing?

"Hey Prince fans, Did you like Purple Rain? Did you like the Purple Rain re-master? Did you like the 2nd Purple Rain re-master? Did you like the 3rd Purple Rain re-master? Well now you can buy the 4th Re-master... now with VHS footage you've owned for 20 years!!!!1!one."

On one hand you're saying Purple Rain should be on it's 4th remaster. On the other you're saying there is no market for anything from the vault. The door swings both ways.

u have a point... but still ur really outdated...

Noodled24 said:

BartVanHemelen said:

So stop releasing new music and just keep churning out Purple Rain re-masters with "bonus" crap fans have had for years?

But waiting for that elusive offer WRT the vault? Ain't gonna happen, especially not with a music industry that isn't getting richer and a dwindling fan base. Nobody's going to pay Prince stupid money for his back catalogue + vault, especially not when he's probably going to be a bitch about it and perhaps actively try to sabotage it.

If that's the case - then who is the audience for the multiple re-masters you're proposing?

"Hey Prince fans, Did you like Purple Rain? Did you like the Purple Rain re-master? Did you like the 2nd Purple Rain re-master? Did you like the 3rd Purple Rain re-master? Well now you can buy the 4th Re-master... now with VHS footage you've owned for 20 years!!!!1!one."

On one hand you're saying Purple Rain should be on it's 4th remaster. On the other you're saying there is no market for anything from the vault. The door swings both ways.

This may be news to you, but Google owns YouTube. They want you to use it. Anyone with a brain (your excused, apparently) would understand that it's there for just that purpose. But I suspect you'd go to a bookstore for a bagel.

Noodled24 said:

LittlePurpleYoda said:

Google also makes things easily searchable, sorted and tagged. It also doesn't just search YouTube. It searches other video sites.

Yours are the arguments of a sycophant.

I'm not sure they are.

Paul McCartney is definitely trying to shine light on his post-Beatles work by doing those Wings reissues. Some of the albums are just remastered with nothing new on 'em.

I wonder how many old copies of Prince's CDs are hanging around? I have been seeing them on sale for years now, as if they are deleted. That's kinda where you have to start, before you try to move NEW editions into stores (the few stores left).

BartVanHemelen said:

There are some other articles on SDE where he discusses what is involved in a remaster (check the recent article about A-Ha reissues, or the one about his involvement with the Paul Young box set)

I am interested but can't find this article.

LittlePurpleYoda said:

This may be news to you, but Google owns YouTube. They want you to use it. Anyone with a brain (your excused, apparently) would understand that it's there for just that purpose. But I suspect you'd go to a bookstore for a bagel.

Noodled24 said:

I am aware Google owns youtube. That still doesn't change the fact that searching Youtube, searches Youtube.com. Searching Google, searches (wait for it...) the entire public internet (including youtube and other video sharing sites (dailymotion etc.)

You're right that Google wants everyone to use Youtube. But they only want that because they profit from it. You don't have to do everything the Forbes 100 companies tell you to do.

If this bookstore of yours had a cafe, you're right. I'd go there for a bagel. You strike me as more of a McDonnalds kinda guy. Some people like to read over lunch, others prefer colouring in.

Noodled24 said:

LittlePurpleYoda said:

This may be news to you, but Google owns YouTube. They want you to use it. Anyone with a brain (your excused, apparently) would understand that it's there for just that purpose. But I suspect you'd go to a bookstore for a bagel.

I am aware Google owns youtube. That still doesn't change the fact that searching Youtube, searches Youtube.com. Searching Google, searches (wait for it...) the entire public internet (including youtube and other video sharing sites (dailymotion etc.)

You're right that Google wants everyone to use Youtube. But they only want that because they profit from it. You don't have to do everything the Forbes 100 companies tell you to do.

If this bookstore of yours had a cafe, you're right. I'd go there for a bagel. You strike me as more of a McDonnalds kinda guy. Some people like to read over lunch, others prefer colouring in.

Eh, nope. Haven't been to McDonald's in over a decade, but thanks for the attempted condescension. Clearly, any attempt to make a point with you flies higher over your head than a 747. Not to blow your mind with facts or anything, but even 5 years ago, searches for YouTube content accounted for 28% of all Google searches. Most people would take that as a clear indication that if you're searching for video content it's more worthwhile to go directly to the place where the majority of them are stored, categorized, tagged & far easier to work with than the vast expanse of Google itself. Numerous artists take advantage of this with their own YouTube channels. Others aren't dickish enough that they actually sue their fans or at the very least threaten them with legal action, like Prince.

But continue to belabor your lack of a point...feel free.

LittlePurpleYoda said:

LittlePurpleYoda said:

Noodled24 said:

I am aware Google owns youtube. That still doesn't change the fact that searching Youtube, searches Youtube.com. Searching Google, searches (wait for it...) the entire public internet (including youtube and other video sharing sites (dailymotion etc.)

You're right that Google wants everyone to use Youtube. But they only want that because they profit from it. You don't have to do everything the Forbes 100 companies tell you to do.

If this bookstore of yours had a cafe, you're right. I'd go there for a bagel. You strike me as more of a McDonnalds kinda guy. Some people like to read over lunch, others prefer colouring in.

Eh, nope. Haven't been to McDonald's in over a decade, but thanks for the attempted condescension.

You only get to say that if you didn't try it first yourself.

Clearly, any attempt to make a point with you flies higher over your head than a 747. Not to blow your mind with facts or anything, but even 5 years ago, searches for YouTube content accounted for 28% of all Google searches.

Link to where you got that info.

It still doesn't change the fact "Google" performs a wider search than "Youtube"

Most people would take that as a clear indication that if you're searching for video content it's more worthwhile to go directly to the place where the majority of them are stored,

Why is that a clear indication? We've already established you're more likely to find Prince videos via a Google search than a Youtube search.

Your "clear indication" is utterly wrong.

categorized, tagged & far easier to work with than the vast expanse of Google itself. Numerous artists take advantage of this with their own YouTube channels. Others aren't dickish enough that they actually sue their fans or at the very least threaten them with legal action, like Prince.

Everything you just said about Youtube also applies to DailyMotion - Which google will search while youtube wont.

But continue to belabor your lack of a point...feel free.

So have you found all Prince's videos on YouTube? No? Oh... try a google search then.

For some reason some fans seem to be under the impression that if Prince uploaded his old music videos to YouTube some kind of magic will happen and all of a sudden he'll be selling millions of records again.

Nobody in this entire thread has pointed to an example of an established artist who was able to use Youtube to increase their sales. New artists use it to build a small following which helps take them to a wider audience. Or they're one hit wonders like "Psy"

[Edited 10/25/15 8:02am]