The Prince podcast is out this week and has a very interesting interview with Phillip Lassiter - horn arranger and section leader of the NPG horns. They get into a lot of detail about how songs like Big City and Mutiny came about - arrangement techniques and many other interesting tidbits - I personally really liked it and I think a lot of you would find it informative. Here is the link:

http://podcastjuice.net/prince-podcast-philip-lassiter-interview/

Enjoy!

[Edited 1/22/16 1:54am]

I'm very bored with 'supposed insider leaks and info'. It's not trustworthy. For the musicians talking, it's kinda like the exaggerated bullsht the rest of us put on our resumes and say in job interviews.

funksterr said:

I'm very bored with 'supposed insider leaks and info'. It's not trustworthy. For the musicians talking, it's kinda like the exaggerated bullsht the rest of us put on our resumes and say in job interviews.

Did you listen to it? I thought it was a great interview.

djThunderfunk said:

funksterr said:

I'm very bored with 'supposed insider leaks and info'. It's not trustworthy. For the musicians talking, it's kinda like the exaggerated bullsht the rest of us put on our resumes and say in job interviews.

Did you listen to it? I thought it was a great interview.

I didn't. I just think Prince had a point when he said that some of the things we hear from former bandmembers aren't the whole story. We kind of take their word for everything they say. Some of them could be wrong and some of them could be exaggerating.

funksterr said:

djThunderfunk said:

Did you listen to it? I thought it was a great interview.

I didn't. I just think Prince had a point when he said that some of the things we hear from former bandmembers aren't the whole story. We kind of take their word for everything they say. Some of them could be wrong and some of them could be exaggerating.

Of course they're not the whole story--that's obvious. But they are part of it, and a valid part of it, as long as the people involved are being honest in their account. But that's true of every account anyone could give of anything he or she was involved in... and when it comes to these events, these people are giving accounts, unlike Prince himself, who just complains that people are telling their stories. And what some people don't realize (or what admit) is that should Prince decide to tell his stories, those accounts would also be limited to his perspective and subject to his own honesty and recollection, neither of which is necessarily accurate.

So, the more accounts the better--any historian who relied on only one source would be of questionable worth. And one who just made stuff up without any source would be insane. And if Prince doesn't like it, let him do some real talking--the kind he stands behind, instead of the kind he refuses to let be recorded so he can distance himself from or deny later.

I have a hard time focusing on audio podcasts and interviews since either I'm reading or watching something, or I'm listening and doing something at the same time. I need to keep my eyes busy. I wish there was a transcript

[Edited 1/21/16 1:58am]

EddieC said:

funksterr said:

I didn't. I just think Prince had a point when he said that some of the things we hear from former bandmembers aren't the whole story. We kind of take their word for everything they say. Some of them could be wrong and some of them could be exaggerating.

Of course they're not the whole story--that's obvious. But they are part of it, and a valid part of it, as long as the people involved are being honest in their account. But that's true of every account anyone could give of anything he or she was involved in... and when it comes to these events, these people are giving accounts, unlike Prince himself, who just complains that people are telling their stories. And what some people don't realize (or what admit) is that should Prince decide to tell his stories, those accounts would also be limited to his perspective and subject to his own honesty and recollection, neither of which is necessarily accurate.

So, the more accounts the better--any historian who relied on only one source would be of questionable worth. And one who just made stuff up without any source would be insane. And if Prince doesn't like it, let him do some real talking--the kind he stands behind, instead of the kind he refuses to let be recorded so he can distance himself from or deny later.

That's the problem. They have to know they are commiting Prince-career suicide when they speak about him without his permission. It's kind of like honor among thieves: 'Listen, I'm back-stabbing Prince right now with this interview, but everything I say is true and you can trust me!' It's kind of creepy and a lot of it has proven to be false over time. These are working musicians. This is the entertainment industry. They aren't here to provide reliable, historically accurate information. We need to remember that.

funksterr said:

EddieC said:

Of course they're not the whole story--that's obvious. But they are part of it, and a valid part of it, as long as the people involved are being honest in their account. But that's true of every account anyone could give of anything he or she was involved in... and when it comes to these events, these people are giving accounts, unlike Prince himself, who just complains that people are telling their stories. And what some people don't realize (or what admit) is that should Prince decide to tell his stories, those accounts would also be limited to his perspective and subject to his own honesty and recollection, neither of which is necessarily accurate.

So, the more accounts the better--any historian who relied on only one source would be of questionable worth. And one who just made stuff up without any source would be insane. And if Prince doesn't like it, let him do some real talking--the kind he stands behind, instead of the kind he refuses to let be recorded so he can distance himself from or deny later.

That's the problem. They have to know they are commiting Prince-career suicide when they speak about him without his permission. It's kind of like honor among thieves: 'Listen, I'm back-stabbing Prince right now with this interview, but everything I say is true and you can trust me!' It's kind of creepy and a lot of it has proven to be false over time. These are working musicians. This is the entertainment industry. They aren't here to provide reliable, historically accurate information. We need to remember that.

There is absolutely no back stabbing in this interview. Try giving it a listen before making an opinion. Just sayin'...

funksterr said:

djThunderfunk said:

Did you listen to it? I thought it was a great interview.

I didn't. I just think Prince had a point when he said that some of the things we hear from former bandmembers aren't the whole story. We kind of take their word for everything they say. Some of them could be wrong and some of them could be exaggerating.

If you look at it from a music historian/researcher's POV, testimonies from people who were around is all we got save the very few factual things Prince is willing to talk about in interviews. The game is to check out whether testimonies contradict each other, and to try and identify when an interviewee may be inclined to lie or distort facts for any reason, but you basically have to rely on their word. It even happened that sometimes one person gave 2 different accounts of a single story. I'm not 100% sure but I think I remember Fink telling one story about why he became a doctor (I think in Possessed) that differs from the story he told in his last interview (though I may be mistaken and what I think was his first statement could be Dez' account of the story from his own book, not having either with me here, I can't check). Similarly certain things from Per Nilsen and Uptown's past research seems to have been contradicted by Madhoiuseman's more recent research, both researched being primarily based on interviews.

Now yeah, some people probably have made mistakes, or lied, but keeping that in mind we can't discard their statements entirely, because they're all we have.

thedoorkeeper said:

Bog City

funksterr said:

djThunderfunk said:

Did you listen to it? I thought it was a great interview.

I didn't. I just think Prince had a point when he said that some of the things we hear from former bandmembers aren't the whole story. We kind of take their word for everything they say. Some of them could be wrong and some of them could be exaggerating.

.

Which was a pretty rich comment coming from a guy who can't be arsed to properly credit people for their contributions.

.

Nobody's stopping Prince from telling his side. The opposite can't be said, however.

BartVanHemelen said:

funksterr said:

I didn't. I just think Prince had a point when he said that some of the things we hear from former bandmembers aren't the whole story. We kind of take their word for everything they say. Some of them could be wrong and some of them could be exaggerating.

.

Which was a pretty rich comment coming from a guy who can't be arsed to properly credit people for their contributions.

.

Nobody's stopping Prince from telling his side. The opposite can't be said, however.

As you know as much as I do, there are very few proven cases of Prince stealing/omitting credits or taking royalties from anyone on a dozen tracks. And all of those are from 1978-1997. During those years, Prince actually gave lots of other people credits that they didn't deserve (and sometimes even royalties), on dozens and dozens of songs. So I don't know what u're trying to say here. Of course 2 rights don't undo a wrong, but you make it sound as if Prince had stolen credits or royalties on dozens of songs, when I actually find that 6 to 12 songs on a discography that counts hundreds of them is really the exception, not the rule.

.

Out of the blue what do we have:

- Co-writing credits on My Love Is Forever from Chris Moon (who later stole Make It Through The Storm as a retaliation)

- Writing credits on Do Me, Baby from André (who had himself stolen it from Eddie Hazel)

- Co-writing credits on Partyup from Morris (it was a deal so no harm done)

- The drum programming on The Belle Of St.. Mark and co-writing credits on The Bird and Jungle Love from Jesse (who later stole P's arrangements on Do Yourself A Favor as a retaliation)

- Co-writing credits on Kiss by David Z (who said he felt it was fair enough given all the work Prince gave him)

- Co-writing credits on Well Done by David Z and Levi

- Musician credit on Diamonds And Pearl by Sheila

- Co-writing credits on Power fantastic by Wendy & Lisa

- Co-writing credits from T. Hammer from Soul Sanctuary (apparently Sandra St. Victor had not informed Prince that he had co-composed it with her)

- Co-writing credit from Sandra St. Victor on Van Gogh

- Co-writing credits from T. Hammer and Vince Reid from Eye'll Never Be Another Fool (apparently Sandra St. Victor had not informed Prince that they had co-composed it with her)

Are there any others? I may have forgotten a few uncredited musicians and maybe even one or two uncredited/unpaid co-writers but that's it. 13 songs.

.

On the other hand P gave his lyrics royalties and credits to Mark on 2 Mazarati songs, gave royalties for the near-totality of his composing on Romance 1600 to Sheila, gave royaties to the whole band for every song on Gold Nigga and Exodus when they hardly co-wrote anything on either, gave royalties and credits to Tamar and Bria on the near totality of their respective songs, and very likely gave lots of royaties to Carmen on her album (I doubt she ever wrote a line of lyrics). And of course, without giving royalties, Prince hid his contributions and gave writing and playing credits to the Revolution, The NPG, The Time, The 6's, The Family, Madhouse, the Lovesexy band and a shitload of others on nearly everything he released, as Prince or on side-projects, between 1981 and 1998.

.

So OK, he stole shit and it was wrong. But he didn't make a career out of stealing shit.

funksterr said:

thedoorkeeper said:

Bog City

Song for a Labyrinth sequel, Bowie tribute?

paulludvig said:

funksterr said:

I didn't. I just think Prince had a point when he said that some of the things we hear from former bandmembers aren't the whole story. We kind of take their word for everything they say. Some of them could be wrong and some of them could be exaggerating.

Wow! Did you have an epiphany?

Yes. I'm beginning to think Susan Rogers was exaggerating when she said Prince had unreleased music that was better than anything he actually put out, because that was nearly 30 years ago and we still haven't heard it. I also believe Prince really isn't a genius of any sort, musiclal or otherwise, though all the bandmembers claim he is so smart and creative. I doubt the drug-free thing too, but again Alan Leeds said Prince was as clean as a whistle.

funksterr said:

paulludvig said:

funksterr said: Wow! Did you have an epiphany?

Yes. I'm beginning to think Susan Rogers was exaggerating when she said Prince had unreleased music that was better than anything he actually put out, because that was nearly 30 years ago and we still haven't heard it. I also believe Prince really isn't a genius of any sort, musiclal or otherwise, though all the bandmembers claim he is so smart and creative. I doubt the drug-free thing too, but again Alan Leeds said Prince was as clean as a whistle.

here we go

lwr001 said:

funksterr said:

Yes. I'm beginning to think Susan Rogers was exaggerating when she said Prince had unreleased music that was better than anything he actually put out, because that was nearly 30 years ago and we still haven't heard it. I also believe Prince really isn't a genius of any sort, musiclal or otherwise, though all the bandmembers claim he is so smart and creative. I doubt the drug-free thing too, but again Alan Leeds said Prince was as clean as a whistle.

here we go

It goes both ways. If Prince says they are untrustworthy then we have to scrutinize everything, the good and the bad. My point though is that we shouldn't just take everything they say as fact becaue they clearly have their own agendas.

funksterr said:

lwr001 said:

here we go

It goes both ways. If Prince says they are untrustworthy then we have to scrutinize everything, the good and the bad. My point though is that we shouldn't just take everything they say as fact becaue they clearly have their own agendas.

2 things...

1) none of this is relevent to the interview with Lassiter. He said nothing controversial about Prince.

B) I find much of what Prince has said in interviews to be untrustworthy as he also clearly has an agenda.

Just sayin'...

lwr001 said:

KingSausage said:

What the fuck happened to this thread?

Yeah that.

So, anyway, Lassiter gave Prince Podcast a great interview. I recommend everyone check it out!

ufoclub said:

djThunderfunk said:

2 things...

1) none of this is relevent to the interview with Lassiter. He said nothing controversial about Prince.

B) I find much of what Prince has said in interviews to be untrustworthy as he also clearly has an agenda.

Just sayin'...

Setting Prince's behavior aside for a minute... and just focusing on the people talking about him in interviews.... how do we, as fans, know they aren't completely full of it? IMO, and I've said this for a long time, after consuming a ton of these 'insider' interviews, we shouldn't take these things as absolute fact. No disrepect meant to anyone, including whoever is being interviewed this time. I just think we should remember there is a reason why these people are talking and it's not to satisfy fan curiosity.

I thought it might have been a pretty boring listen but I actually found it fascinating. Philip Lassiter has some interesting stories to tell. The information he shared about Prince was both respectful and insightful. I loved it when he talked about how if you ever forget something Prince told you, you'd better have at least written it down.

databank said:

And of course, without giving royalties, Prince hid his contributions and gave writing and playing credits to the Revolution, The NPG, The Time, The 6's, The Family, Madhouse, the Lovesexy band and a shitload of others on nearly everything he released, as Prince or on side-projects, between 1981 and 1998.

A lot of Revolution and NPG ('90-96) songs must have originated in jam sessions, so it's only right he credits them. On record that is, not at the Publishing Company - so they don't receive royalties as you say.

The Carmen Elektra lyrics are a whole other kind of bad, I think she did write them herself. That said, I still like listening to that album more than anything Prince released this century... go Carmen go Carmen go!

funksterr said:

funksterr said:

laurarichardson said:

funksterr said:

That's the problem. They have to know they are commiting Prince-career suicide when they speak about him without his permission. It's kind of like honor among thieves: 'Listen, I'm back-stabbing Prince right now with this interview, but everything I say is true and you can trust me!' It's kind of creepy and a lot of it has proven to be false over time. These are working musicians. This is the entertainment industry. They aren't here to provide reliable, historically accurate information. We need to remember that.

--- Is something wrong with you? Because you did not take the time to listen to the interview but took the time to go off on a tirad. Phil does not say anything bad in the interview and he apparently did arrange the horns on Phase 2.

For full disclosure Phil did the horn arrangement for Big City - and Mutiny on the Arsenio Hall show but not the entire Phase 2 album. However he was the horn section leader and toured with Prince for over 2 years. And I fully agree - I do not understand why people are going on tirades and talking about back stabbing, etc when they haven't even listened to the interview - it truly makes no sense.

The interview is about the creative process of horn and string arrangements with some interesting and funny stories included but no back stabbing of any kind.