It's a great compilation.

Some great songs on it, so diffrent from phase 1 which is a good thing.

Your answer is yes. all prince albums are compilations, so i dont mind.

Depends on your definition of quality.

I think HNR P2 is a good album, a bit boring at the end, but it's good... But compared to what? Compared to the last 4 albums, then yes I guess it's the "strongest" but if we compare it to other works is it strong? Or do we just compare it to the future works yet to be released?

I don't know what's quality or not quality on the org.. Everyone has "opinion"

i'll just stick with saying from 1980-1988 his albums were flawless. That's all.

feeluupp said:

ThisOne said:

TrevorAyer said:

funkaholic1972 said:

TrevorAyer said:

Are fans relived bb8 is not jar jar?

As for the album, I prefer phase 1 by a long way. Phase 2 is ok to me, nothing bad on it, it just doesn't do it for me as a collection. Still loving Phase I though.

There's a nice sticky about the album.

Its really not that good. It has couple of good tracks but overall pretty weak. I think thats why its a Tidal release only. I don't mind as I like getting the new music to create my own masterpiece album. Its got a couple of really solid songs I like

I think it's a very good album and I'm relieved it's nothing like Phase 1. Even though it's a compilation of odds and ends from the last several years, I think it actually works well as a cohesive album. I'm enjoying it so much, I haven't bothered to listen to any other music since it came out, and I normally listen to a lot.

Aerogram said:

There's a nice sticky about the album.

yes it is ..but what about the CD version?

feeluupp said:

Depends on your definition of quality.

I think HNR P2 is a good album, a bit boring at the end, but it's good... But compared to what? Compared to the last 4 albums, then yes I guess it's the "strongest" but if we compare it to other works is it strong? Or do we just compare it to the future works yet to be released?

I don't know what's quality or not quality on the org.. Everyone has "opinion"

i'll just stick with saying from 1980-1988 his albums were flawless. That's all.

The problem in appreciating an artist's work, is precisely the absurdity of comparing. Comparing Hitnrun Phase Two to, say, SOTT is absurd, it says nothing about the qualities of either album. Both were recorded by an artist of a totally different age, in totally different worlds, in the context of entirely different musical scenes and cultural environments. Comparing 2 contemporary albums or an album with another released a year earlier could possibly make sense but comparing the work of a man in 2015 with what he was doing in 1985 is pretty absurd. I keep reading it not just here but even in professional reviews (stuff like "XXX isn't SOTT but still, it's a great record"). Of course it ain't fucking SOTT. No one in their right mind would expect it to be SOTT when Prince was young, wild, sexually burning, still pretty naive, pretty lost, rebellious and on top of the avant-garde of his generation and the zeitgest of the time. Now we have other people, young musicians fulfilling that role. I don't expect Prince to do what they do, neither a 25 year old artist to do what Prince does now. Certain things are still there because they're fundamentals of both P's music and personality, but people need to move on with those bloody 80-88 years. They're gone. It's past. This is 2015. Things must be judged by the standards of 2015. And not just for Prince. Milan Kundera's current books shouldn't be judged by comparison to his early masterpieces. Martin Scorcese's current films shouldn't be judged by comparison to his early masterpieces. Etc. That's lack of perspective by excess of perspective if u ask me ^^

databank said:

TrevorAyer said:

databank said:

The problem in appreciating an artist's work, is precisely the absurdity of comparing. Comparing Hitnrun Phase Two to, say, SOTT is absurd, it says nothing about the qualities of either album. Both were recorded by an artist of a totally different age, in totally different worlds, in the context of entirely different musical scenes and cultural environments. Comparing 2 contemporary albums or an album with another released a year earlier could possibly make sense but comparing the work of a man in 2015 with what he was doing in 1985 is pretty absurd. I keep reading it not just here but even in professional reviews (stuff like "XXX isn't SOTT but still, it's a great record"). Of course it ain't fucking SOTT. No one in their right mind would expect it to be SOTT when Prince was young, wild, sexually burning, still pretty naive, pretty lost, rebellious and on top of the avant-garde of his generation and the zeitgest of the time. Now we have other people, young musicians fulfilling that role. I don't expect Prince to do what they do, neither a 25 year old artist to do what Prince does now. Certain things are still there because they're fundamentals of both P's music and personality, but people need to move on with those bloody 80-88 years. They're gone. It's past. This is 2015. Things must be judged by the standards of 2015. And not just for Prince. Milan Kundera's current books shouldn't be judged by comparison to his early masterpieces. Martin Scorcese's current films shouldn't be judged by comparison to his early masterpieces. Etc. That's lack of perspective by excess of perspective if u ask me ^^

musicians are not athletes (except the drummer of course) therefore the music should only improve with age and experience .. Not get worse .. No excuses

And in 99,99 % of cases, it does not.

Explain that instead of spouting a pious theory.

databank said:

You will compare an artist's new output with his best work.

That being said, you do not have to do that with Prince to conclude that most of this century's songs

have been embarassing.

If you look at Paul McCartney's output this century: most of it doesn't do it for me (and I'm a big fan) but at least he doesn't release anything willfully bad (with the odd exception like 'Everybody Out There') .

Aerogram said:

TrevorAyer said:

databank said: musicians are not athletes (except the drummer of course) therefore the music should only improve with age and experience .. Not get worse .. No excuses

And in 99,99 % of cases, it does not.

Explain that instead of spouting a pious theory.

99.0 percent of pop musicians that dont look pretty anymore and dont have all the good writers writing their hits anymore .. but real musicians keep improving or at least maintaining .. prince is a real musician who wrote ALL OF HIS HITS ALL BY HIMZSELF lol ... so he shouldn't be getting worse .. its just writing music in your head .. its not like trying to dunk on michael jordon .. the fact is tho that great writers like robert smith or frank black and of course dylan have all put out pretty great quality music consistently as they get older .. and even to prove my point further .. even prince has put out quality music lately .. i have my own mix of recent stuff that i really like .. that said its perfectly reasonable to compare with his past and expect as good or better or at least close to it .. in moments prince achieves pretty good .. in other moments he is clearly not trying very hard and it shows and it is perfectly reasonable to say .. if it isn't as good as SOTT dont release it go back try again not buying it dont like it makes me feel like u think ur fans are really really dumb and will buy up anything u put your name on .. in terms of the records p releases .. they really are rubbish on the whole .. but contained within are some inspired moments that had he held his music up to a higher standard, perhaps he could have put out something that really could compare with SOTT ... and that is worth doing imo